Literature DB >> 9152449

Prediction of success from a multidisciplinary treatment program for chronic low back pain.

J Hildebrandt1, M Pfingsten, P Saur, J Jansen.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: The study included 90 disabled patients with chronic low back pain recruited from a pain clinic who were admitted to an 8-week program of functional restoration and behavioral support. Initial evaluations included a medical examination, rating of the physical impairment, a personal interview, a visual analogue scale to record pain intensity, an assessment of limitations for daily activities, a pain disability index, a depression and psychovegetative scale, and a scale to evaluate general living standards. The physical assessment included different flexibility measurements, measurement of power and endurance through standardized exercises, and measurements of isokinetic trunk and lifting strength and general endurance. The measurements were repeated at the end of the 8-week program and thereafter an intervals of 6 and 12 months. Final analyses were carried out on 82 patients.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether objective or subjective signs most influence the outcome of rehabilitation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In recent years, several studies have shown that active and intensive multimodal treatment of chronic low back pain is successful. Until now there has been lack of information about which patients will respond to the therapy and what is the most effective part of treatment.
METHODS: Prognostic factors (return to work, pain intensity, self-assessment of treatment success by patients) were tested by studying variance and regression analyses for their ability to predict treatment outcome.
RESULTS: Certain factors were identified that had a significant impact on determining the probability of a patient's return to work and the reduction of pain intensity. These factors included self-evaluation for predicting a return to work, the length of absence from work, application for pension, and a decrease is disability after treatment. Overall satisfaction with treatment was best determined by the number of medical consultations before treatment, the extent of disability, previous measures taken for coping with the disease, and reduction of disability during treatment. Medical background, medical diagnosis, and physical impairment had no predictive value. Physical variables (i.e., mobility, strength, endurance, and physical performance) also demonstrated only limited predictive value.
CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated that the most important variable in determining a successful treatment of chronic low back pain is the reduction of subjective feelings of disability in patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9152449     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199705010-00011

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


  41 in total

1.  Prognostic factors and treatment-related changes associated with return to work in the multimodal treatment of chronic back pain.

Authors:  A A Vendrig
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  1999-06

2.  Development of the Functional Assessment Taxonomy.

Authors:  E A Gaudino; L N Matheson; F A Mael
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2001-09

3.  Failed back surgery syndrome: a suggested algorithm of care.

Authors:  Praveen Ganty; Manohar Sharma
Journal:  Br J Pain       Date:  2012-11

4.  Individual recovery expectations and prognosis of outcomes in non-specific low back pain: prognostic factor review.

Authors:  Jill A Hayden; Maria N Wilson; Richard D Riley; Ross Iles; Tamar Pincus; Rachel Ogilvie
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-11-25

5.  Secondary prevention of work disability: community-based psychosocial intervention for musculoskeletal disorders.

Authors:  Michael J L Sullivan; L Charles Ward; Dean Tripp; Douglas J French; Heather Adams; William D Stanish
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2005-09

6.  Long-term effects of supervised physical training in secondary prevention of low back pain.

Authors:  Irina Maul; Thomas Läubli; Michael Oliveri; Helmut Krueger
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-02-16       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 7.  A systematic review of bio-psychosocial risk factors for an unfavourable outcome after lumbar disc surgery.

Authors:  Jasper J den Boer; Rob A B Oostendorp; Tjemme Beems; Marten Munneke; Margreet Oerlemans; Andrea W M Evers
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-05-25       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  The role of back muscle endurance, maximum force, balance and trunk rotation control regarding lifting capacity.

Authors:  Peter Schenk; Andreas Klipstein; Susanne Spillmann; Jesper Strøyer; Thomas Laubli
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2004-11-20       Impact factor: 3.078

9.  Functional self-efficacy beliefs influence functional capacity evaluation.

Authors:  Alexander K Asante; E Sharon Brintnell; Douglas P Gross
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2007-03

10.  Exercise prescription for chronic back or neck pain: who prescribes it? who gets it? What is prescribed?

Authors:  Janet K Freburger; Timothy S Carey; George M Holmes; Andrea S Wallace; Liana D Castel; Jane D Darter; Anne M Jackman
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2009-02-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.