Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29739371›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2018

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.

J Rantonen, J Karppinen, A Vehtari, S Luoto, E Viikari-Juntura, M Hupli, A Malmivaara, S Taimela

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00908102 (The Prevalence of Low Back Symptoms in a Finnish Forestry Company - Effectiveness of Primary Care Interventions for Non-acute Low Back Symptoms in Occupational Health. Two Separate Randomised Controlled Trials), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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.

NCT00908102 naunknown statusnot on this map

The Prevalence of Low Back Symptoms in a Finnish Forestry Company - Effectiveness of Primary Care Interventions for Non-acute Low Back Symptoms in Occupational Health. Two Separate Randomised Controlled Trials (RCT) of Various Levels.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of HelsinkiRan2001 to 2016Enrolled505ConditionsLow Back Pain, Recurrent, Low Back PainArmsModerate, Mild, Mild vs. NC, Moderate vs. NC
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. What can we learn from long-term studies on chronic low back pain? A scoping 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 · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Interventions for the Management of Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain: Revision 2021.The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

J RantonenUniversity of Helsinki, Doctoral School in Health Sciences, Helsinki, Finland. jarmorantonen@gmail.com.
J KarppinenMedical Research Center Oulu, University of Oulu and Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
A VehtariHelsinki Institute for Information Technology HIIT, Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.
S LuotoDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, South Karelia Social and Health Care District, Lappeenranta, Finland.
E Viikari-JunturaFinnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland.
M HupliDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, South Karelia Social and Health Care District, Lappeenranta, Finland.
A MalmivaaraNational Institute for Health and Welfare, Centre for Health and Social Economics, Helsinki, Finland.
S TaimelaEvalua International, Espoo, Finland.
Etelä-Karjalan sosiaali ja terveyspiiri · FIAalto University · FIFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIFinnish Institute of Occupational Health · FIHelsinki University Hospital · FIOulu University Hospital · FIUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

Työsuojelurahasto 114047
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe assessed the effectiveness of three interventions that were aimed to reduce non-acute low back pain (LBP) related symptoms in the occupational health setting.

methodsBased on a survey (n = 2480; response rate 71%) on LBP, we selected a cohort of 193 employees who reported moderate LBP (Visual Analogue Scale VAS > 34 mm) and fulfilled at least one of the following criteria during the past 12 months: sciatica, recurrence of LBP ≥ 2 times, LBP ≥ 2 weeks, or previous sickness absence. A random sample was extracted from the cohort as a control group (Control, n = 50), representing the natural course of LBP. The remaining 143 employees were invited to participate in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of three 1:1:1 allocated parallel intervention arms: multidisciplinary rehabilitation (Rehab, n = 43); progressive exercises (Physio, n = 43) and self-care advice (Advice, n = 40). Seventeen employees declined participation in the intervention. The primary outcome measures were physical impairment (PHI), LBP intensity (Visual Analogue Scale), health related quality of life (QoL), and accumulated sickness absence days. We imputed missing values with multiple imputation procedure. We assessed all comparisons between the intervention groups and the Control group by analysing questionnaire outcomes at 2 years with ANOVA and sickness absence at 4 years by using negative binomial model with a logarithmic link function.

resultsMean differences between the Rehab and Control groups were - 3 [95% CI -5 to - 1] for PHI, - 13 [- 24 to - 1] for pain intensity, and 0.06 [0.00 to 0.12] for QoL. Mean differences between the Physio and Control groups were - 3 [95% CI -5 to - 1] for PHI, - 13 [- 29 to 2] for pain intensity, and 0.07 [0.01 to 0.13] for QoL. The main effects sizes were from 0.4 to 0.6. The interventions were not effective in reducing sickness absence.

conclusionsRehab and Physio interventions improved health related quality of life, decreased low back pain and physical impairment in non-acute, moderate LBP, but we found no differences between the Advice and Control group results. No effectiveness on sickness absence was observed.

trial registrationNumber NCT00908102 Clinicaltrials.gov.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthAdolescentAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeSecondary PreventionSick LeaveSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultDisabilityEarly managementGraded activityLBPMultidisciplinaryNatural course of LBPPopulation basedQuasi-randomised designRCTRehabilitationSickness absenceUsual care

Identifiers

PMID29739371
PMCPMC5941604
OpenAlexW2799975470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.