39
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evaluation of a multimodal pain rehabilitation programme in primary care based on clinical register data: a feasibility study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim:

          Investigate the feasibility of identifying a well-defined treatment group and a comparable reference group in clinical register data.

          Background:

          There is insufficient knowledge on how to avert neck/back pain from turning chronic or to impair work ability. The Swedish Government implemented a national multimodal rehabilitation (MMR) programme in primary care intending to promote work ability, reduce sick leave and increase return to work. Since randomised control trial data for effect is lacking, it is important to evaluate existing observational data from clinical settings.

          Methods:

          We identified all unique patients with musculoskeletal pain (MSP) diagnoses undergoing the MMR programme in primary care in the Skåne Health care Register ( n = 2140) during 2010–2011. A reference cohort in primary care ( n = 56 300) with similar MSP diagnoses, same ages and the same level of sick leave before baseline was identified for the same period. The reference cohort received ordinary care and treatment in primary care. The final study group consisted of 603 eligible MMR patients and 2874 eligible reference patients. Socio-economic and health-related baseline data including sick leave one year before up to two years after baseline were compared between groups.

          Findings:

          There were significant socio-economic and health differences at baseline between the MMR and the reference patients, with the MMR group having lower income, higher morbidity and more sick leave days. Sick leave days per year decreased significantly in the MMR group (118–102 days, P < 0.001) and in the reference group (50–42 days, P < 0.001) from one year before baseline to two years after.

          Conclusions:

          It was not feasible to identify a comparable reference group based on clinical register data. Despite an ambitious attempt to limit selection bias, significant baseline differences in socio-economic and health were present. In absence of randomised trials, effects of MMR cannot be sufficiently evaluated in primary care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          1987 Volvo award in clinical sciences. A new clinical model for the treatment of low-back pain.

          Because there is increasing concern about low-back disability and its current medical management, this analysis attempts to construct a new theoretic framework for treatment. Observations of natural history and epidemiology suggest that low-back pain should be a benign, self-limiting condition, that low back-disability as opposed to pain is a relatively recent Western epidemic, and that the role of medicine in that epidemic must be critically examined. The traditional medical model of disease is contrasted with a biopsychosocial model of illness to analyze success and failure in low-back disorders. Studies of the mathematical relationship between the elements of illness in chronic low-back pain suggest that the biopsychosocial concept can be used as an operational model that explains many clinical observations. This model is used to compare rest and active rehabilitation for low-back pain. Rest is the commonest treatment prescribed after analgesics but is based on a doubtful rationale, and there is little evidence of any lasting benefit. There is, however, little doubt about the harmful effects--especially of prolonged bed rest. Conversely, there is no evidence that activity is harmful and, contrary to common belief, it does not necessarily make the pain worse. Experimental studies clearly show that controlled exercises not only restore function, reduce distress and illness behavior, and promote return to work, but actually reduce pain. Clinical studies confirm the value of active rehabilitation in practice. To achieve the goal of treating patients rather than spines, we must approach low-back disability as an illness rather than low-back pain as a purely physical disease. We must distinguish pain as a purely the symptoms and signs of distress and illness behavior from those of physical disease, and nominal from substantive diagnoses. Management must change from a negative philosophy of rest for pain to more active restoration of function. Only a new model and understanding of illness by physicians and patients alike makes real change possible.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic low back pain: systematic review.

            To assess the effect of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation on clinically relevant outcomes in patients with chronic low back pain. Systematic literature review of randomised controlled trials. A total of 1964 patients with disabling low back pain for more than three months. Pain, function, employment, quality of life, and global assessments. Ten trials reported on a total of 12 randomised comparisons of multidisciplinary treatment and a control condition. There was strong evidence that intensive multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation with functional restoration improves function when compared with inpatient or outpatient non-multidisciplinary treatments. There was moderate evidence that intensive multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation with functional restoration reduces pain when compared with outpatient non-multidisciplinary rehabilitation or usual care. There was contradictory evidence regarding vocational outcomes of intensive multidisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention. Some trials reported improvements in work readiness, but others showed no significant reduction in sickness leaves. Less intensive outpatient psychophysical treatments did not improve pain, function, or vocational outcomes when compared with non-multidisciplinary outpatient therapy or usual care. Few trials reported effects on quality of life or global assessments. The reviewed trials provide evidence that intensive multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation with functional restoration reduces pain and improves function in patients with chronic low back pain. Less intensive interventions did not show improvements in clinically relevant outcomes.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Work health promotion, job well-being, and sickness absences--a systematic review and meta-analysis.

              The aim of this systematic literature analysis was to study the association between work health promotion and job well-being, work ability, absenteeism, and early retirement. This systematic review is a part of a large research project studying multiple workplace factors and interventions that may affect workers' health and well-being. Original articles published in 1970 to 2005 were searched in Medline and PsycINFO databases, the main search terms being health promotion, well-being, work ability, sick leave, and disability pension. Out of 1312 references and 35 potentially eligible publications, 10 studies were included in the analysis. Other sources producing 36 eligible studies, 46 studies in total were included in the analysis. There is moderate evidence that work health promotion decreases sickness absences (risk ratio [RR], 0.78; range, 0.10 to 1.57) and work ability (RR, 1.38; range, 1.15 to 1.66). It also seems to increase mental well-being (RR, 1.39; range, 0.98 to 1.91), but not physical well-being. There is no evidence on disability pension. Exercise seems to increase overall well-being (RR, 1.25; range, 1.05 to 1.47) and work ability (RR, 1.38; range, 1.15 to 1.66), but education and psychological methods do not seem to affect well-being or sickness absences. Sickness absences seem to be reduced by activities promoting healthy lifestyle (RR, 0.80; range, 0.74 to 0.93) and ergonomics (RR, 0.72; range, 0.13 to 1.57). Work health promotion is valuable on employees' well-being and work ability and productive in terms of less sickness absences. Activities involving exercise, lifestyle, and ergonomics are potentially effective. On the other hand, education and psychological means applied alone do not seem effective. Work health promotion should target both physical and psychosocial environments at work.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Prim Health Care Res Dev
                Prim Health Care Res Dev
                PHC
                Primary Health Care Research & Development
                Cambridge University Press (Cambridge, UK )
                1463-4236
                1477-1128
                2020
                14 January 2020
                : 21
                : e2
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Faculty of medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Orthopedics, Lund University , Lund, Sweden
                [2 ]Department of Research and Development, Region Kronoberg, Växjö, Sweden
                [3 ]Department of Health Sciences, Medical Faculty, Lund University , Lund, Sweden
                [4 ]R&D Department, Skåne University Hospital , Lund, Sweden
                [5 ]Faculty of Medicine, Research Group Rehabilitation Medicine, Health Sciences Center, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
                [6 ]Blekinge Center of Competence, Region Blekinge, Karlskrona, Sweden
                [7 ]Department of Healthcare Governance, Region Skåne, Malmö, Sweden
                [8 ]Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Institute of Laboratory Medicine, Lund University , Lund, Sweden
                Author notes
                Author for correspondence: Charlotte Post Sennehed, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Orthopedics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. E-mail: charlotte.sennehed@ 123456kronoberg.se
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7477-3757
                Article
                00088 S1463423619000884
                10.1017/S1463423619000884
                7003522
                31934844
                ffa395c9-283f-4469-8025-225dde3f09fe
                © Cambridge University Press 2020

                This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 11 April 2019
                : 31 July 2019
                : 07 October 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 2, References: 52, Pages: 10
                Categories
                Research

                back pain,feasibility,musculoskeletal pain,multimodal rehabilitation,primary care,prospective study,sick leave

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content120

                Cited by3

                Most referenced authors1,794