Literature DB >> 15939915

A clinical return-to-work rule for patients with back pain.

Clermont E Dionne1, Renée Bourbonnais, Pierre Frémont, Michel Rossignol, Susan R Stock, Isabelle Larocque.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tools for early identification of workers with back pain who are at high risk of adverse occupational outcome would help concentrate clinical attention on the patients who need it most, while helping reduce unnecessary interventions (and costs) among the others. This study was conducted to develop and validate clinical rules to predict the 2-year work disability status of people consulting for nonspecific back pain in primary care settings.
METHODS: This was a 2-year prospective cohort study conducted in 7 primary care settings in the Quebec City area. The study enrolled 1007 workers (participation, 68.4% of potential participants expected to be eligible) aged 18-64 years who consulted for nonspecific back pain associated with at least 1 day's absence from work. The majority (86%) completed 5 telephone interviews documenting a large array of variables. Clinical information was abstracted from the medical files. The outcome measure was "return to work in good health" at 2 years, a variable that combined patients' occupational status, functional limitations and recurrences of work absence. Predictive models of 2-year outcome were developed with a recursive partitioning approach on a 40% random sample of our study subjects, then validated on the rest.
RESULTS: The best predictive model included 7 baseline variables (patient's recovery expectations, radiating pain, previous back surgery, pain intensity, frequent change of position because of back pain, irritability and bad temper, and difficulty sleeping) and was particularly efficient at identifying patients with no adverse occupational outcome (negative predictive value 78%- 94%).
INTERPRETATION: A clinical prediction rule accurately identified a large proportion of workers with back pain consulting in a primary care setting who were at a low risk of an adverse occupational outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15939915      PMCID: PMC558170          DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1041159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  56 in total

1.  Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 2.

Authors:  D L Riddle; P W Stratford; J M Binkley
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1998-11

2.  Can we screen for problematic back pain? A screening questionnaire for predicting outcome in acute and subacute back pain.

Authors:  S J Linton; K Halldén
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 3.442

3.  The contribution of job satisfaction to the transition from acute to chronic low back pain.

Authors:  R A Williams; S D Pruitt; J N Doctor; J E Epping-Jordan; D R Wahlgren; I Grant; T L Patterson; J S Webster; M A Slater; J H Atkinson
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 3.966

4.  Length of disability and cost of workers' compensation low back pain claims.

Authors:  L Hashemi; B S Webster; E A Clancy; E Volinn
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 2.162

5.  Is health locus of control a 3-factor or a 2-factor construct?

Authors:  F Talbot; A Nouwen; J Gauthier
Journal:  J Clin Psychol       Date:  1996-09

Review 6.  Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards.

Authors:  A Laupacis; N Sekar; I G Stiell
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-02-12       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  The Quebec Task Force classification for Spinal Disorders and the severity, treatment, and outcomes of sciatica and lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  S J Atlas; R A Deyo; D L Patrick; K Convery; R B Keller; D E Singer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Health care and indemnity costs across the natural history of disability in occupational low back pain.

Authors:  D A Williams; M Feuerstein; D Durbin; J Pezzullo
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Low back pain: predictors of absenteeism, residual symptoms, functional impairment, and medical costs in Oregon workers' compensation recipients.

Authors:  P G Butterfield; P S Spencer; N Redmond; A Feldstein; N Perrin
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.214

Review 10.  Health care providers should use a common language in relation to low back pain patients.

Authors:  C Cedraschi; M Nordin; A L Nachemson; T L Vischer
Journal:  Baillieres Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1998-02
View more
  47 in total

1.  Individual expectation: an overlooked, but pertinent, factor in the treatment of individuals experiencing musculoskeletal pain.

Authors:  Joel E Bialosky; Mark D Bishop; Joshua A Cleland
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2010-06-30

2.  Do horses with poor welfare show 'pessimistic' cognitive biases?

Authors:  S Henry; C Fureix; R Rowberry; M Bateson; M Hausberger
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2017-01-12

Review 3.  Work-related outcome assessment instruments.

Authors:  Achim Elfering
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-11-23       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Clinical prediction rule for return to work after back pain.

Authors:  Christopher Maher
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2005-06-07       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 5.  Reducing sickness absence from work due to low back pain: how well do intervention strategies match modifiable risk factors?

Authors:  William S Shaw; Steven J Linton; Glenn Pransky
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2006-12

Review 6.  Prognostic factors for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Christian D Mallen; George Peat; Elaine Thomas; Kate M Dunn; Peter R Croft
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 7.  Clinical prediction rules for physical therapy interventions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jason M Beneciuk; Mark D Bishop; Steven Z George
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2008-12-18

8.  Return to work in a cohort of low back pain patients: development and validation of a clinical prediction rule.

Authors:  Martijn W Heymans; Johannes R Anema; Stef van Buuren; Dirk L Knol; Willem van Mechelen; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2009-02-18

9.  The comparative prognostic value of directional preference and centralization: a useful tool for front-line clinicians?

Authors:  Audrey Long; Stephen May; Tak Fung
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2008

10.  Development of the Return-to-Work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale (ROSES) and Validation with Workers Suffering from a Common Mental Disorder or Musculoskeletal Disorder.

Authors:  Marc Corbière; Alessia Negrini; Marie-José Durand; Louise St-Arnaud; Catherine Briand; Jean-Baptiste Fassier; Patrick Loisel; Jean-Philippe Lachance
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2017-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.