ArticleScientific reports2025
Experiences and perceptions of employees and healthcare professionals on a multidisciplinary program for the secondary prevention of low back pain.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Low back pain (LBP) can lead to disability and sick leave, impacting work participation and overall health. Given the complex and multifactorial nature of LBP, Belgium's Federal Agency for Occupational Risks (FEDRIS) promotes a secondary prevention strategy for LBP among workers engaged in ergonomically demanding tasks. This strategy includes multidisciplinary-based rehabilitation (MBR) and an optional workplace intervention. This paper explored the experiences and perceptions of employees and healthcare professionals (HCPs) regarding the secondary prevention program with a focus on the MBR component, aiming to identify its strengths, challenges, and potential solutions. A multicenter qualitative design involving six semistructured focus groups was employed. The participants included 15 employees who attended the program because of LBP and 24 HCPs involved in its delivery. The data were analyzed via thematic analysis. Three major themes were identified: functional and work-related outcomes, content-related factors, and duration and continuation. Positive outcomes included improvements in pain, function, and return to work (RTW), with workplace adaptations and ergonomic guidance playing key roles. Success factors such as education, exercise therapy, motivation, and social interaction were highlighted. However, challenges were identified, including limited communication between centers and employers, insufficient psychological support, and a lack of follow-up to sustain the program's effects. This qualitative evaluation highlights that person-centered, biopsychosocial approaches-encompassing individualized education, ergonomic adaptations, and psychological support-are crucial for optimizing the FEDRIS MBR program's long-term impact on LBP and RTW outcomes. Consistency in staffing, structured follow-up, and systematic prescreening are key areas for improvement. Although limited by a small sample size and retrospective design, these findings pinpoint actionable refinements that future longitudinal studies can explore to ensure sustained, cost-effective rehabilitation benefits.
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.