BACKGROUND: The enormous socioeconomic burden of low back pain emphasises the need for effective management of this problem, especially in an occupational context. To address this, occupational guidelines have been issued in various countries. AIMS: To compare available international guidelines dealing with the management of low back pain in an occupational health care setting. METHODS: The guidelines were compared regarding generally accepted quality criteria using the AGREE instrument, and also summarised regarding the guideline committee, the presentation, the target group, and assessment and management recommendations (that is, advice, return to work strategy, and treatment). RESULTS: and CONCLUSIONS: The results show that the quality criteria were variously met by the guidelines. Common flaws concerned the absence of proper external reviewing in the development process, lack of attention to organisational barriers and cost implications, and lack of information on the extent to which editors and developers were independent. There was general agreement on numerous issues fundamental to occupational health management of back pain. The assessment recommendations consisted of diagnostic triage, screening for "red flags" and neurological problems, and the identification of potential psychosocial and workplace barriers for recovery. The guidelines also agreed on advice that low back pain is a self limiting condition and, importantly, that remaining at work or an early (gradual) return to work, if necessary with modified duties, should be encouraged and supported.
BACKGROUND: The enormous socioeconomic burden of low back pain emphasises the need for effective management of this problem, especially in an occupational context. To address this, occupational guidelines have been issued in various countries. AIMS: To compare available international guidelines dealing with the management of low back pain in an occupational health care setting. METHODS: The guidelines were compared regarding generally accepted quality criteria using the AGREE instrument, and also summarised regarding the guideline committee, the presentation, the target group, and assessment and management recommendations (that is, advice, return to work strategy, and treatment). RESULTS: and CONCLUSIONS: The results show that the quality criteria were variously met by the guidelines. Common flaws concerned the absence of proper external reviewing in the development process, lack of attention to organisational barriers and cost implications, and lack of information on the extent to which editors and developers were independent. There was general agreement on numerous issues fundamental to occupational health management of back pain. The assessment recommendations consisted of diagnostic triage, screening for "red flags" and neurological problems, and the identification of potential psychosocial and workplace barriers for recovery. The guidelines also agreed on advice that low back pain is a self limiting condition and, importantly, that remaining at work or an early (gradual) return to work, if necessary with modified duties, should be encouraged and supported.
Authors: K Karjalainen; A Malmivaara; M van Tulder; R Roine; M Jauhiainen; H Hurri; B Koes Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2001-02-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: J Bart Staal; Hynek Hlobil; Maurits W van Tulder; Albère J A Köke; Tjabe Smid; Willem van Mechelen Journal: Sports Med Date: 2002 Impact factor: 11.136
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
Authors: Carlo Ammendolia; David Cassidy; Ivan Steensta; Sophie Soklaridis; Eleanor Boyle; Stephanie Eng; Hamer Howard; Bains Bhupinder; Pierre Côté Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2009-06-09 Impact factor: 2.362