Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22296950›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2012

Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary care program on recovery and return to work of patients after gynaecological surgery; design of a randomized controlled trial.

Antonie Vonk Noordegraaf, Judith A F Huirne, Hans A M Brölmann, Mark H Emanuel, Paul J M van Kesteren, Gunilla Kleiverda, Jos P Lips, Alexander Mozes, Andreas L Thurkow, Willem van Mechelen and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Workplace interventions to prevent work disability in workers on sick leave.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The involvement of gynaecological patients in the development of a clinical guideline for resumption of (work) activities in the Netherlands.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

11 authors.

Antonie Vonk NoordegraafDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. t.vonknoordegraaf@vumc.nl
Judith A F Huirne
Hans A M Brölmann
Mark H Emanuel
Paul J M van Kesteren
Gunilla Kleiverda
Jos P Lips
Alexander Mozes
Andreas L Thurkow
Willem van Mechelen
Johannes R Anema

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReturn to work after gynaecological surgery takes much longer than expected, irrespective of the level of invasiveness. In order to empower patients in recovery and return to work, a multidisciplinary care program consisting of an e-health intervention and integrated care management including participatory workplace intervention was developed. METHODS/

designWe designed a randomized controlled trial to assess the effect of the multidisciplinary care program on full sustainable return to work in patients after gynaecological surgery, compared to usual clinical care. Two hundred twelve women (18-65 years old) undergoing hysterectomy and/or laparoscopic adnexal surgery on benign indication in one of the 7 participating (university) hospitals in the Netherlands are expected to take part in this study at baseline. The primary outcome measure is sick leave duration until full sustainable return to work and is measured by a monthly calendar of sickness absence during 26 weeks after surgery. Secondary outcome measures are the effect of the care program on general recovery, quality of life, pain intensity and complications, and are assessed using questionnaires at baseline, 2, 6, 12 and 26 weeks after surgery. DISCUSSION: The discrepancy between expected physical recovery and actual return to work after gynaecological surgery contributes to the relevance of this study. There is strong evidence that long periods of sick leave can result in work disability, poorer general health and increased risk of mental health problems. We expect that this multidisciplinary care program will improve peri-operative care, contribute to a faster return to work of patients after gynaecological surgery and, as a consequence, will reduce societal costs considerably.

trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR2087.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedAbsenteeismAdolescentAdultAgedEmploymentFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansHysterectomyLaparoscopyMiddle AgedNetherlandsOccupational Health ServicesOutcome Assessment, Health CarePain

Identifiers

PMID22296950
PMCPMC3355012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.