Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33501902›Full record

Trial reportHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2021

Individualised placement and support programme for people unemployed because of chronic pain: a feasibility study and the InSTEP pilot RCT.

Cathy Linaker, Simon Fraser, Cathy Price, Nick Maguire, Paul Little, Ira Madan, Rafael Pinedo-Villanueva, David Coggon, Cyrus Cooper, Georgia Ntani and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 99% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Cathy LinakerMRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1091-9283
Simon FraserAcademic Unit of Primary Care and Population Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4172-4406
Cathy PriceSolent NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0111-9364
Nick MaguireDepartment of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4295-8068
Paul LittleDepartment of Primary Care and Population, Aldermoor Health Centre, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3664-1873
Ira MadanGuy's & St Thomas's NHS Foundation Trust, King's College London, Occupational Health Department, St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2200-7329
Rafael Pinedo-VillanuevaNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4723-5128
David CoggonMRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1930-3987
Cyrus CooperMRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3510-0709
Georgia NtaniMRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7481-6860
Karen Walker-BoneMRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5992-1459
Southampton General Hospital · GBBroadmoor Hospital · GBNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBSolent NHS Trust · GBSt Thomas' Hospital · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Department of Health 15/108/02Medical Research Council G0400491Medical Research Council MC_U147585819Medical Research Council MC_U147585824Medical Research Council MC_U147585827Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1014Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1015Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic pain is a common cause of health-related incapacity for work among people in the UK. Individualised placement and support is a systematic approach to rehabilitation, with emphasis on early supported work placement. It is effective in helping people with severe mental illness to gain employment, but has not been tested for chronic pain.

objectiveTo inform the design of a definitive randomised controlled trial to assess the clinical effectiveness of individualised placement and support for people unemployed because of chronic pain.

methodsA mixed-methods feasibility study comprising qualitative interviews and focus groups with key stakeholders, alongside a pilot trial. STUDY

participantsPrimary care-based health-care professionals, employment support workers, employers, clients who participated in an individualised placement and support programme, and individuals aged 18-64 years with chronic pain who were unemployed for at least 3 months.

interventionAn individualised placement and support programme integrated with a personalised, responsive pain management plan, backed up by communication with a general practitioner and rapid access to community-based pain services. OUTCOMES: Outcomes included stakeholder views about a trial and methods of recruitment; the feasibility and acceptability of the individualised placement and support intervention; study processes (including methods to recruit participants from primary care, training and support needs of the employment support workers to integrate with pain services, acceptability of randomisation and the treatment-as-usual comparator); and scoping of outcome measures for a definitive trial.

resultsAll stakeholders viewed a trial as feasible and important, and saw the relevance of employment interventions in this group. Using all suggested methods, recruitment was feasible through primary care, but it was slow and resource intensive. Recruitment through pain services was more efficient. Fifty people with chronic pain were recruited (37 from primary care and 13 from pain services). Randomisation was acceptable, and 22 participants were allocated to individualised placement and support, and 28 participants were allocated to treatment as usual. Treatment as usual was found acceptable. Retention of treatment-as-usual participants was acceptable throughout the 12 months. However, follow-up of individualised placement and support recipients using postal questionnaires proved challenging, especially when the participant started paid work, and new approaches would be needed for a trial. Clients, employment support workers, primary care-based health-care professionals and employers contributed to manualisation of the intervention. No adverse events were reported.

conclusionUnless accurate and up-to-date employment status information can be collected in primary care health records, or linkage can be established with employment records, research such as this relating to employment will be impracticable in primary care. The trial may be possible through pain services; however, clients may differ. Retention of participants proved challenging and methods for achieving this would need to be developed. The intervention has been manualised.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN30094062.

fundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in

Indexed as

Chronic PainMental DisordersCost-Benefit AnalysisFeasibility StudiesHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalCHRONIC PAINEMPLOYMENTFEASIBILITY STUDIESFOCUS GROUPSFOLLOW-UP STUDIESOUTCOME ASSESSMENTPAIN MANAGEMENTPILOT STUDIESPRIMARY HEALTH CAREQUALITY OF LIFEREHABILITATIONREHABILITATION/VOCATIONALRETURN TO WORKUNEMPLOYMENTVOCATIONAL

Identifiers

PMID33501902
PMCPMC7869008
OpenAlexW3122140384

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.