Literature DB >> 19412140

What works best for whom? An exploratory, subgroup analysis in a randomized, controlled trial on the effectiveness of a workplace intervention in low back pain patients on return to work.

Ivan A Steenstra1, Dirk L Knol, Paulien M Bongers, Johannes R Anema, Willem van Mechelen, Henrica C W de Vet.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Exploratory subgroup analysis in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).
OBJECTIVE: To detect possible moderators in the effectiveness of a workplace intervention in a population of workers with sick leave due to sub acute nonspecific low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In a recently published RCT, a workplace intervention was effective on return to work, compared to usual care. Examining the heterogeneity of effect sizes within the population in this RCT (n = 196) can lead to information on the effectiveness of the intervention in subgroups of patients.
METHODS: A subgroup analysis was performed by adding interaction terms to the statistical model. Before analysis the following possible moderators for treatment were identified: age, gender, pain, functional status, heavy work, and sick leave in the previous 12 months. Cox regression analyses were performed and survival curves were plotted.
RESULTS: The interaction (P = 0.02) between age (dichotomized at the median value) and the workplace intervention indicates a modifying effect. The workplace intervention is more effective for workers > or =44 years (HR, 95% CI = 2.5, [1.6, 4.1] vs. 1.2 [0.8, 1.8] for workers <44 years old). The interaction between sick leave in the previous 12 months and the workplace intervention is significant (P = 0.02). The intervention is more effective for workers with previous sick leave (HR, 95% CI = 2.8 [1.7, 4.9] vs. 1.3 [0.8, 2.0]). A modifying effect of gender, heavy work, and pain score and functional status on the effectiveness of this intervention was not found.
CONCLUSION: The findings from these exploratory analyses should be tested in future RCTs. This workplace intervention seems very suitable for return to work of older workers and workers with previous sick leave. Gender, perceived heavy work, and baseline scores in pain and functional status should not be a basis for assignment to this intervention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19412140     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a09631

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  13 in total

1.  Development of a computer-based clinical decision support tool for selecting appropriate rehabilitation interventions for injured workers.

Authors:  Douglas P Gross; Jing Zhang; Ivan Steenstra; Susan Barnsley; Calvin Haws; Tyler Amell; Greg McIntosh; Juliette Cooper; Osmar Zaiane
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2013-12

Review 2.  Effectiveness of community- and workplace-based interventions to manage musculoskeletal-related sickness absence and job loss: a systematic review.

Authors:  Keith T Palmer; Elizabeth C Harris; Cathy Linaker; Mary Barker; Wendy Lawrence; Cyrus Cooper; David Coggon
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 7.580

Review 3.  Return-to-work coordination programmes for improving return to work in workers on sick leave.

Authors:  Nicole Vogel; Stefan Schandelmaier; Thomas Zumbrunn; Shanil Ebrahim; Wout El de Boer; Jason W Busse; Regina Kunz
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-03-30

4.  Recurrence of medically certified sickness absence according to diagnosis: a sickness absence register study.

Authors:  C A M Roelen; P C Koopmans; J R Anema; A J van der Beek
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2010-03

5.  Subgroup analyses on return to work in sick-listed employees with low back pain in a randomised trial comparing brief and multidisciplinary intervention.

Authors:  Christina M Stapelfeldt; David H Christiansen; Ole K Jensen; Claus V Nielsen; Karin D Petersen; Chris Jensen
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2011-05-25       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  Clinical challenges of classification based targeted therapies for non-specific low back pain: What do physiotherapy practitioners and managers think?

Authors:  Liba Sheeran; Philippa Coales; Valerie Sparkes
Journal:  Man Ther       Date:  2014-11-22

7.  Physical activity and relaxation in the work setting to reduce the need for recovery: what works for whom?

Authors:  Margriet A G Formanoy; Elise Dusseldorp; Jennifer K Coffeng; Iven Van Mechelen; Cecile R L Boot; Ingrid J M Hendriksen; Erwin C P M Tak
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Sustainability of return to work in sick-listed employees with low-back pain. Two-year follow-up in a randomized clinical trial comparing multidisciplinary and brief intervention.

Authors:  Chris Jensen; Ole Kudsk Jensen; Claus Vinther Nielsen
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2012-08-25       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  Predicting time on prolonged benefits for injured workers with acute back pain.

Authors:  Ivan A Steenstra; Jason W Busse; David Tolusso; Arold Davilmar; Hyunmi Lee; Andrea D Furlan; Ben Amick; Sheilah Hogg-Johnson
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2015-06

Review 10.  A Health- and Resource-Oriented Perspective on NSLBP.

Authors:  Cornelia Rolli Salathé; Achim Elfering
Journal:  ISRN Pain       Date:  2013-09-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.