Trial reportEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2007
Low back pain in general practice: cost-effectiveness of a minimal psychosocial intervention versus usual care.
Trial report in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estimating productivity costs using the friction cost approach in practice: a systematic review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2016Pooled it
- Enhanced care by generalists for functional somatic symptoms and disorders in primary care.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Value-based care in the management of spinal disorders: a systematic review of cost-utility analysis.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2012Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of guideline-endorsed treatments for low back pain: a systematic review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2011Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of general practice care for low back pain: a systematic review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2011Pooled it
- How is recovery from low back pain measured? A systematic review of the literature.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2011Pooled it
- Effectiveness of three interventions for secondary prevention of low back pain in the occupational health setting - a randomised controlled trial with a natural course control.BMC public health · 2018Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of providing patients with information on managing mild low-back symptoms in an occupational health setting.BMC public health · 2016Trial
- The COPE LBP trial: cognitive patient education for low back pain--a cluster randomized controlled trial in primary care.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2010Trial
- Saudi Clinical Practice Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Low Back Pain and Sciatica in Adults.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An intervention that can prevent low back pain (LBP) becoming chronic, may not only prevent great discomfort for patients, but also save substantial costs for the society. Psychosocial factors appear to be of importance in the transition of acute to chronic LBP. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of an intervention aimed at psychosocial factors to usual care in patients with (sub)acute LBP. The study design was an economic evaluation alongside a cluster-randomized controlled trial, conducted from a societal perspective with a follow-up of 1 year. Sixty general practitioners in 41 general practices recruited 314 patients with non-specific LBP of less than 12 weeks' duration. General practitioners in the minimal intervention strategy (MIS) group explored and discussed psychosocial prognostic factors. Usual care (UC) was not protocolized. Clinical outcomes were functional disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire), perceived recovery and health-related quality of life (EuroQol). Cost data consisted of direct and indirect costs and were measured by patient cost diaries and general practitioner registration forms. Complete cost data were available for 80% of the patients. Differences in clinical outcomes between both the groups were small and not statistically significant. Differences in cost data were in favor of MIS. However, the complete case analysis and the sensitivity analyses with imputed cost data were inconsistent with regard to the statistical significance of this difference in cost data. This study presents conflicting points of view regarding the cost-effectiveness of MIS. We conclude that (Dutch) general practitioners, as yet, should not replace their usual care by this new intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.