ArticleThe Australasian medical journal2015
Does injury claim status and benefit status predict low back pain outcomes?
Article in The Australasian medical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The clinical course of acute, subacute and persistent low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn New Zealand the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) is a state-funded insurance agency that accepts claims for accidental injuries, including lumbar spine injuries. It is unknown whether ACC claim status (accepted, not accepted) affects low back pain (LBP) outcomes, or whether benefit status (e.g., sickness, disability) further affects outcomes in patients without ACC cover.
aimsThis study aimed to determine whether ACC claim and benefit status are likely to influence a range of outcomes for people with LBP in New Zealand.
methodsA prospective survey of low back pain patients was performed (April 2008-October 2010). ACC claim status was recorded, and individuals without accepted claims indicated benefit status. Surveys were sent at multiple time points; pain, functional limitation, psychological factors, and general health were assessed. Statistical analysis was undertaken using ANCOVA and ANOVA (p<0.05).
resultsIn total, 168 patients completed the study. Six-month measures showed individuals with no ACC claim for LBP to overall have poorer outcomes (mental health, p=0.039; pain, p=0.045; functional limitation, p=0.049); sub-group analysis (no ACC claim) between those with or without a benefit showed those on benefits to have significantly higher functional limitation (p<0.001), poorer physical health (p=0.002), greater pain (p=0.027), and stronger fear avoidance behaviours for both work (p=0.047) and physical activity (p=0.35).
conclusionFindings indicate individuals with accepted ACC claims for LBP have significantly better outcomes than those without, and patients on benefits with no accepted ACC claim for LBP have even poorer outcomes.
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.