ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2022
Matching Perceived Physical Capacity and Work Demands: A New Classification of the Modified Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS).
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose The aims of this study were (1) to develop a new classification for the scores of the Modified Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS) which is related to the level of physical work demands and (2) to test the predictive value of the M-SFS classification. Methods The classification was carried out in 194 subjects with musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) attending a work-related medical rehabilitation from four rehabilitation centers. External criterion was a Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE)-based work capacity estimation according to the classification used in Germany ("REFA") which differentiates between light, light to medium, medium and heavy work. The optimal cut-offs for the M-SFS were allocated using the Youden index. Logistic regression models were calculated based on 147 subjects who participated in the follow-up survey to evaluate the predictive validity of the M-SFS classification with regard to sustainable return to work (RTW; employment at the 3-month follow-up combined with a low level of sick leave). Results Cut-offs for M-SFS scores were 44 (light work), 54 (light to medium work), 62 (medium work) and 73 (heavy work). A match between the M-SFS category and the level of physical work demands was associated with a more than threefold higher RTW chance compared to subjects with a negative discrepancy. In case the M-SFS category was above the physical demand level the RTW-chance was more than 13-fold higher. Conclusions M-SFS scores can be classified into four levels of physical work demands. If the perceived work capacity matches or exceeds the level of physical work demands patients with MSD have a substantially higher probability to return to work after rehabilitation. More studies are needed to confirm or reject our findings and overcome some of the weaknesses of this study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34024022What 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.