COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Subacute and chronic, non-specific back and neck pain: cognitive-behavioural rehabilitation versus primary care. A randomized controlled trial

Odd Lindell, Sven-Erik Johansson, Lars-Erik Strender
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2008 December 30, 9: 172
19116007

BACKGROUND: In the industrial world, non-specific back and neck pain (BNP) is the largest diagnostic group underlying sick-listing. For patients with subacute and chronic (= full-time sick-listed for 43 - 84 and 85 - 730 days, respectively) BNP, cognitive-behavioural rehabilitation was compared with primary care. The specific aim was to answer the question: within an 18-month follow-up, will the outcomes differ in respect of sick-listing and number of health-care visits?

METHODS: After stratification by age (< or = 44/> or = 45 years) and subacute/chronic BNP, 125 Swedish primary-care patients were randomly allocated to cognitive-behavioural rehabilitation (rehabilitation group) or continued primary care (primary-care group). Outcome measures were Return-to-work share (percentage) and Return-to-work chance (hazard ratios) over 18 months, Net days (crude sick-listing days x degree), and the number of Visits (to physicians, physiotherapists etc.) over 18 months and the three component six-month periods. Descriptive statistics, Cox regression and mixed-linear models were used.

RESULTS: All patients: Return-to-work share and Return-to-work chance were equivalent between the groups. Net days and Visits were equivalent over 18 months but decreased significantly more rapidly for the rehabilitation group over the six-month periods (p < .05). Subacute patients: Return-to-work share was equivalent. Return-to-work chance was significantly greater for the rehabilitation group (hazard ratio 3.5 [95%CI1.001 - 12.2]). Net days were equivalent over 18 months but decreased significantly more rapidly for the rehabilitation group over the six-month periods and there were 31 days fewer in the third period. Visits showed similar though non-significant differences and there were half as many in the third period. Chronic patients: Return-to-work share, Return-to-work chance and Net days were equivalent. Visits were equivalent over 18 months but tended to decrease more rapidly for the rehabilitation group and there were half as many in the third period (non-significant).

CONCLUSION: The results were equivalent over 18 months. However, there were indications that cognitive-behavioural rehabilitation in the longer run might be superior to primary care. For subacute BNP, it might be superior in terms of sick-listing and health-care visits; for chronic BNP, in terms of health-care visits only. More conclusive results concerning this possible long-term effect might require a longer follow-up.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
19116007
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"