P Loisel1, J Lemaire, S Poitras, M-J Durand, F Champagne, S Stock, B Diallo, C Tremblay. 1. Department of Surgery (Division of Orthopedics), Université de Sherbrooke and Centre de recherche clinique en réadaptation au travail PREVICAP, Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, 1111, Longueuil, Québec, Canada, J4K 5G4. patrick.loisel@usherbrooke.ca
Abstract
AIMS: To test the long term cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness of the Sherbrooke model of management of subacute occupational back pain, combining an occupational and a clinical rehabilitation intervention. METHODS: A randomised trial design with four arms was used: standard care, occupational arm, clinical arm, and Sherbrooke model arm (combined occupational and clinical interventions). From the Quebec WCB perspective, a cost-benefit (amount of consequence of disease costs saved) and cost-effectiveness analysis (amount of dollars spent for each saved day on full benefits) were calculated for each experimental arm of the study, compared to standard care. RESULTS: At the mean follow up of 6.4 years, all experimental study arms showed a trend towards cost benefit and cost effectiveness. These results were owing to a small number of very costly cases. The largest number of days saved from benefits was in the Sherbrooke model arm. CONCLUSIONS: A fully integrated disability prevention model for occupational back pain appeared to be cost beneficial for the workers' compensation board and to save more days on benefits than usual care or partial interventions. A limited number of cases were responsible for most of the long term disability costs, in accordance with occupational back pain epidemiology. However, further studies with larger samples will be necessary to confirm these results.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To test the long term cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness of the Sherbrooke model of management of subacute occupational back pain, combining an occupational and a clinical rehabilitation intervention. METHODS: A randomised trial design with four arms was used: standard care, occupational arm, clinical arm, and Sherbrooke model arm (combined occupational and clinical interventions). From the Quebec WCB perspective, a cost-benefit (amount of consequence of disease costs saved) and cost-effectiveness analysis (amount of dollars spent for each saved day on full benefits) were calculated for each experimental arm of the study, compared to standard care. RESULTS: At the mean follow up of 6.4 years, all experimental study arms showed a trend towards cost benefit and cost effectiveness. These results were owing to a small number of very costly cases. The largest number of days saved from benefits was in the Sherbrooke model arm. CONCLUSIONS: A fully integrated disability prevention model for occupational back pain appeared to be cost beneficial for the workers' compensation board and to save more days on benefits than usual care or partial interventions. A limited number of cases were responsible for most of the long term disability costs, in accordance with occupational back pain epidemiology. However, further studies with larger samples will be necessary to confirm these results.
Authors: R B Cutler; D A Fishbain; H L Rosomoff; E Abdel-Moty; T M Khalil; R S Rosomoff Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 1994-03-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Silje E Reme; Alberto J Caban-Martinez; Justin Young; Anna Arlinghaus; Garry Gray Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2015 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Frederieke G Schaafsma; Karyn Whelan; Allard J van der Beek; Ludeke C van der Es-Lambeek; Anneli Ojajärvi; Jos H Verbeek Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2013-08-30
Authors: Steven J Linton; Doug Gross; Izabela Z Schultz; Chris Main; Pierre Côté; Glenn Pransky; William Johnson Journal: J Occup Rehabil Date: 2005-12
Authors: Ivan A Steenstra; Johannes R Anema; Maurits W van Tulder; Paulien M Bongers; Henrica C W de Vet; Willem van Mechelen Journal: J Occup Rehabil Date: 2006-12