ArticleBMJ open2022
Physician consultation rates and characteristics among workers with chronic pain or headache who participated in a behavioural change program: a retrospective database analysis using real-world healthcare data.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
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
objectiveTo assess the potential benefit of a behavioural change programme in working individuals with chronic pain or headache, in the form of increased physician consultation.
designRetrospective observational database study.
settingMembers of employment-based healthcare insurance in Japan.
participantsIndividual-level data of working individuals aged <75 years from November 2019 through March 2020 were extracted from a database managed by MinaCare Co., Ltd. Included individuals had records of programme participation and chronic pain or headache (self-reported), and did not consult physicians for ≥3 months before programme participation. OUTCOME MEASURES: Physician consultation rates after participating in the programme were examined from December 2019 through March 2020, separately for chronic pain and headache. Baseline characteristics included age, pain numeric rating scale (NRS) score (for chronic pain), suspected migraine (for headache), labour productivity including absenteeism and presenteeism, and 4-month indirect costs in Japanese yen (JPY).
resultsThe baseline mean age (±SD) of 506 individuals with chronic pain was 46.8±10.1 years; that of 352 individuals with headache was 43.6±9.9 years. Of those with chronic pain, 71.4% had an NRS score≥4, and 49.7% of those with headache had suspected migraine. Overall, 11.3% and 5.4% of those with chronic pain or headache consulted physicians, respectively. The mean baseline absenteeism and presenteeism were 1.5% and 19.1% in those with chronic pain, and 1.5% and 23.0% in those with headache. The baseline indirect costs were 586 941.6 JPY and 1 060 281.6 JPY among those with chronic pain or headache, respectively.
conclusionGiven that the individuals did not regularly consult physicians before the programme despite reporting substantial symptoms, our results suggest the potential benefit of educational programmes encouraging physician consultation. Further studies are required to evaluate how to effectively implement such educational programmes via healthcare insurers to reduce the burden of pain symptoms and overall medical costs.
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.