OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of function-centered treatment (FCT) and pain-centered treatment (PCT) on the number of work days, permanent disability, and the unemployment rate. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Inpatient rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (N=174; 79% male; mean age, 42 y) with previous sick leave of 6 weeks or more. INTERVENTIONS:FCT (4 h/d for 3 wk) emphasized activity despite pain by using work simulation, strength, endurance, and cardiovascular training. PCT (2.5h/d for 3 wk) emphasized pain reduction and included passive and active mobilization, stretching, strength training, and a 4-hour mini back school with education and exercise. Analysis was by intention to treat. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Work days, return to work, rate of patients receiving financial compensation for permanent disability, and unemployment rate. Effect sizes (Cohen d) were defined as small (0.2-0.5), moderate (0.5-0.8), and large (>0.8). RESULTS: After 1 year, the FCT group had significantly more work days (mean, 118; median, 39.5; interquartile range [IQR], 0-198) than the PCT group (mean, 74; median, 0; IQR, 0-160; Mann-Whitney U test, P=.011). The odds ratio of returning to work in the FCT group relative to the PCT group was 2.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.9). The differences in unemployment rates and in the numbers of patients receiving compensation for permanent disability were not significant. CONCLUSIONS:FCT is more effective than PCT for increasing work days.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of function-centered treatment (FCT) and pain-centered treatment (PCT) on the number of work days, permanent disability, and the unemployment rate. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Inpatient rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (N=174; 79% male; mean age, 42 y) with previous sick leave of 6 weeks or more. INTERVENTIONS:FCT (4 h/d for 3 wk) emphasized activity despite pain by using work simulation, strength, endurance, and cardiovascular training. PCT (2.5h/d for 3 wk) emphasized pain reduction and included passive and active mobilization, stretching, strength training, and a 4-hour mini back school with education and exercise. Analysis was by intention to treat. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Work days, return to work, rate of patients receiving financial compensation for permanent disability, and unemployment rate. Effect sizes (Cohen d) were defined as small (0.2-0.5), moderate (0.5-0.8), and large (>0.8). RESULTS: After 1 year, the FCT group had significantly more work days (mean, 118; median, 39.5; interquartile range [IQR], 0-198) than the PCT group (mean, 74; median, 0; IQR, 0-160; Mann-Whitney U test, P=.011). The odds ratio of returning to work in the FCT group relative to the PCT group was 2.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.9). The differences in unemployment rates and in the numbers of patients receiving compensation for permanent disability were not significant. CONCLUSIONS:FCT is more effective than PCT for increasing work days.
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: Paul Baker; Carol Coole; Avril Drummond; Sayeed Khan; Catriona McDaid; Catherine Hewitt; Lucksy Kottam; Sarah Ronaldson; Elizabeth Coleman; David A McDonald; Fiona Nouri; Melanie Narayanasamy; Iain McNamara; Judith Fitch; Louise Thomson; Gerry Richardson; Amar Rangan Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-09 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Mandy Scheermesser; Stefan Bachmann; Astrid Schämann; Peter Oesch; Jan Kool Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2012-01-23 Impact factor: 2.362