Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14629775›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2003

Cost effectiveness of a multi-stage return to work program for workers on sick leave due to low back pain, design of a population based controlled trial [ISRCTN60233560].

Ivan A Steenstra, Johannes R Anema, Paulien M Bongers, Henrica C W de Vet, Willem van Mechelen

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for subacute low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Workplace interventions to prevent work disability in workers on sick leave.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ivan A SteenstraInstitute for Research in Extramural Medicine, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. i.steenstra.emgo@med.vu.nl
Johannes R Anema
Paulien M Bongers
Henrica C W de Vet
Willem van Mechelen
Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NLNetherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo describe the design of a population based randomized controlled trial (RCT), including a cost-effectiveness analysis, comparing participative ergonomics interventions between 2-8 weeks of sick leave and Graded Activity after 8 weeks of sick leave with usual care, in occupational back pain management.

methods

designAn RCT and cost-effectiveness evaluation in employees sick-listed for a period of 2 to 6 weeks due to low back pain. Interventions used are 1. Communication between general practitioner and occupational physician plus Participative Ergonomics protocol performed by an ergonomist. 2. Graded Activity based on cognitive behavioural principles by a physiotherapist. 3. Usual care, provided by an occupational physician according to the Dutch guidelines for the occupational health management of workers with low back pain. The primary outcome measure is return to work. Secondary outcome measures are pain intensity, functional status and general improvement. Intermediate variables are kinesiophobia and pain coping. The cost-effectiveness analysis includes the direct and indirect costs due to low back pain. The outcome measures are assessed before randomization (after 2-6 weeks on sick leave) and 12 weeks, 26 weeks and 52 weeks after first day of sick leave. DISCUSSION: The combination of these interventions has been subject of earlier research in Canada. The results of the current RCT will: 1. crossvalidate the Canadian findings in an different sociocultural environment; 2. add to the cost-effectiveness on treatment options for workers in the sub acute phase of low back pain. Results might lead to alterations of existing (inter)national guidelines.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisErgonomicsHumansLow Back PainNetherlandsOccupational DiseasesOccupational Health ServicesOutcome Assessment, Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignSick LeaveWork Capacity EvaluationWorkers' Compensation

Identifiers

PMID14629775
PMCPMC317323
OpenAlexW2133853197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.