The effect of graded activity on patients with subacute low back pain: a randomized prospective clinical study with an operant-conditioning behavioral approach. Does early intervention with a light mobilization program reduce long-term sick leave for low back pain: a 3-year follow-up study. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for subacute low back pain: graded activity or workplace intervention or both? A randomized controlled trial. A 3-year follow-up of a multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme for back and neck pain. Secondary prevention of work-related disability in nonspecific low back pain: does problem-solving therapy help? A randomized clinical trial. Little effect of transfer technique instruction and physical fitness training in reducing low back pain among nurses: a cluster randomised intervention study. Intensive group training versus cognitive intervention in sub-acute low back pain: short-term results of a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Intensive physical and psychosocial training program for patients with chronic low back pain. A controlled clinical trial. Effects of an exercise program on sick leave due to back pain.
The aim of this study was to determine whether graded activity restored occupational function in industrial blue-collar workers who were sick-listed for 8 weeks because of subacute, nonspecific, mechanical low back pain (LBP). Patients with LBP, who had been examined by an orthopedic surgeon and a social worker, were randomly assigned to either an activity group (n = 51) or a control group (n = 52). Patients with defined orthopedic, medical, or psychiatric diagnoses were excluded before randomization. The graded activity program consisted of four parts: (1) measurements of functional capacity; (2) a work-place visit; (3) back school education; and (4) an individual, submaximal, gradually increased exercise program, with an operant-conditioning behavioral approach, based on the results of the tests and the demands of the patient's work. Records of the amount of sick leave taken over a 3-year period (ie, the 1-year periods before, during, and after intervention) were obtained from each patient's Social Insurance Office. The patients in the activity group returned to work significantly earlier than did the patients in the control group. The median number of physical therapist appointments before return to work was 5, and the average number of appointments was 10.7 (SD = 12.3). The average duration of sick leave attributable to LBP during the second follow-up year was 12.1 weeks (SD = 18.4) in the activity group and 19.6 weeks (SD = 20.7) in the control group. Four patients in the control group and 1 patient in the activity group received permanent disability pensions. The graded activity program made the patients occupationally functional again, as measured by return to work and significantly reduced long-term sick leave. A randomized clinical trial.
                To evaluate long-term clinical and economical effects of a light mobilization program on the duration of sick leave for patients with subacute low back pain.
                Twelve-month follow-up results from a previous study showed that early intervention with examination at a spine clinic, giving the patients information, reassurance, and encouragement to engage in physical activity as normal as possible had significant effect in reducing sick leave. At 12-month follow-up, 68.4% in the intervention group were off sick leave, as compared with 56.4% in the control group. Patients in this study were followed-up for a period of 3 years to investigate possible long-term effects.
                Four hundred fifty-seven patients placed on a sick list for 8 to 12 weeks for low back pain were randomized into two groups: an intervention group (n = 237) and a control group (n = 220). The intervention group was examined at a spine clinic and given information and advice to stay active. The control group was not examined at the clinic but was treated within the primary health care.
                Over the 3 years of observation, the intervention group had significantly fewer days of sickness compensation (average 125.7 d/person) than the control group (169.6 d/person). This difference is mainly caused by a more rapid return to work during the first year. There was no significant difference for the second or third year. In particular, there is no increased risk for reoccurrence of illness from early return to work. At 6-month follow-up, patients in the intervention group were less likely to use bed rest and more likely to use stretching and walking to cope with their back pain compared with the control group. This effect diminished. At 12-month follow-up, the only significant difference between the groups was in the use of stretching. Economic returns of the intervention were calculated in terms of increases in the net present value of production for the society because of the reduction in number of days on sick leave. Net benefits accumulated over 3 years of treating the 237 patients in the intervention group amount to approximately 2,822 dollars per person.
                For patients with subacute low back pain, a brief and simple early intervention with examination, information, reassurance, and encouragement to engage in physical activity as normal as possible had economic gains for the society. The effect occurred during the first year after intervention. There were no significant long-term effects of the intervention. The initial gain obtained during the first year does not lead to any increased costs or increased risks for reoccurrence of illness over the next 2 years. Population-based randomized controlled trial.
                To assess the effectiveness of workplace intervention and graded activity, separately and combined, for multidisciplinary rehabilitation of low back pain (LBP).
                Effective components for multidisciplinary rehabilitation of LBP are not yet established.
                Participants sick-listed 2 to 6 weeks due to nonspecific LBP were randomized to workplace intervention (n = 96) or usual care (n = 100). Workplace intervention consisted of workplace assessment, work modifications, and case management involving all stakeholders. Participants still sick-listed at 8 weeks were randomized for graded activity (n = 55) or usual care (n = 57). Graded activity comprised biweekly 1-hour exercise sessions based on operant-conditioning principles. Outcomes were lasting return to work, pain intensity and functional status, assessed at baseline, and at 12, 26, and 52 weeks after the start of sick leave.
                Time until return to work for workers with workplace intervention was 77 versus 104 days (median) for workers without this intervention (P = 0.02). Workplace intervention was effective on return to work (hazard ratio = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3; P = 0.002). Graded activity had a negative effect on return to work (hazard ratio = 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3-0.6; P < 0.001) and functional status. Combined intervention had no effect.
                Workplace intervention is advised for multidisciplinary rehabilitation of subacute LBP. Graded activity or combined intervention is not advised. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of a behavioural medicine rehabilitation programme and the outcome of its two main components, compared to a 'treatment-as-usual' control group. The study employed a 4 x 5 repeated-measures design with four groups and five assessment periods during a 3-year follow-up. The group studied consisted of blue-collar and service/care workers on sick leave, identified in a nationwide health insurance scheme in Sweden. After inclusion, the subjects were randomised to one of the four conditions: behaviour-oriented physiotherapy (PT), cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), behavioural medicine rehabilitation consisting of PT+CBT (BM) and a 'treatment-as-usual' control group (CG). Outcome variables were sick leave, early retirement and health-related quality of life. A cost-effectiveness analysis, comparing the programmes, was made. The results showed, consistently, the full-time behavioural medicine programme being superior to the three other conditions. The strongest effect was found on females. Regarding sick leave, the mean difference in the per-protocol analysis between the BM programme and the control group was 201 days, thus reducing sick leave by about two-thirds of a working year. Rehabilitating women has a substantial impact on costs for production losses, whereas rehabilitating men seem to be effortless with no significant effect on either health or costs. In conclusion, a full-time behavioural medicine programme is a cost-effective method for improving health and increasing return to work in women working in blue-collar or service/care occupations and suffering from back/neck pain. Given the individual and economic burden of chronic work disability in low back pain patients, there is a need for effective preventive interventions. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether problem-solving therapy had a supplemental value when added to behavioral graded activity, regarding days of sick leave and work status.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Employees who were recently on sick leave as a result of nonspecific low back pain were referred to the rehabilitation center by general practitioner, occupational physician, or rehabilitation physician. Forty-five employees had been randomly assigned to the experimental treatment condition that included behavioral graded activity and problem-solving therapy (GAPS), and 39 employees had been randomly assigned to behavioral graded activity and group education (GAGE).
                Days of sick leave and work status. Data were retrieved from occupational health services.
                Data analyses showed that employees in the GAPS group had significantly fewer days of sick leave in the second half-year after the intervention. Moreover, work status was more favorable for employees in this condition, in that more employees had a 100% return-to-work and fewer patients ended up receiving disability pensions one year after the intervention. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these results.
                The addition of problem-solving therapy to behavioral graded activity had supplemental value in employees with nonspecific low back pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a transfer technique education programme (TT) alone or in combination with physical fitness training (TTPT) compared with a control group, who followed their usual routine. Eleven clinical hospital wards were cluster randomised to either intervention (six wards) or to control (five wards). The intervention cluster was individually randomised to TT (55 nurses) and TTPT (50 nurses), control (76 nurses). The transfer technique programme was a 4-d course of train-the-trainers to teach transfer technique to their colleagues. The physical training consisted of supervised physical fitness training 1 h twice per week for 8 weeks. Implementing transfer technique alone or in combination with physical fitness training among a hospital nursing staff did not, when compared to a control group, show any statistical differences according to self-reported low back pain (LBP), pain level, disability and sick leave at a 12-month follow-up. However, the individual randomised intervention subgroup (transfer technique/physical training) significantly improved the LBP-disability (p = 0.001). Although weakened by a high withdrawal rate, teaching transfer technique to nurses in a hospital setting needs to be thoroughly considered. Other priorities such as physical training may be taken into consideration. The current study supports the findings of other studies that introducing transfer technique alone has no effect in targeting LBP. However, physical training seems to have an influence in minimising the LBP consequences and may be important in the discussion of how to prevent LBP or the recurrence of LBP among nursing personnel. To evaluate the short-term effect of physical exercise and a cognitive intervention in low back pain.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Ninety-three patients sick-listed for 8-12 weeks for sub-acute low back pain were randomized to an exercise regime (n = 30), a cognitive intervention (n = 34) or a control group (n = 29).
                Primary outcome measures were pain, disability, sick-listing and satisfaction with care. Secondary outcome measures were self-efficacy for pain and for function, fear-avoidance beliefs, emotional distress, generic health status and life satisfaction.
                Eighteen percent of subjects dropped out. Drop-out was most frequent in the exercise group. At 18 weeks after inclusion fear-avoidance beliefs were reduced in both intervention groups. The cognitive group demonstrated significant improvement in disability, self-efficacy for pain, emotional distress, general health and life satisfaction. Patients in the exercise group were significantly more satisfied with the treatment, and patients following the exercise protocol reduced pain significantly. No effect on sick-listing was seen.
                Cognitive intervention improved disability and may be feasible for most patients sick-listed in the sub-acute phase. Physical exercise reduced patients' symptoms, but requires high motivation by patients. Despite positive effects in intervention groups on variables considered as negative prognostic factors for long-term disability and sickness absence, interventions had no effect on sick-listing. The authors conducted a controlled clinical trial with 1-year follow-up to define the effectiveness of an intensive physical and psychosocial training program on patients with low back pain.
                The intervention group included 152 patients (mean age 40.5 yr, Million index 45.1/100), and the reference group included 141 patients (mean age 40.4 yr, Million-index 44.5/100).
                The progressive intervention program consisted of intensive physical training and psychosocial activation. The outcomes were physical and psychosocial measures, the pain and disability index (Million), sick leaves, and occupational handicap.
                The intervention was more efficient with respect to physical measures and pain and disability index. There were only mild or no differences in changes between the study groups in psychologic variables, sick leaves, or retirement.
                The intervention program could improve physical disability, but to improve occupational handicap, activities of the whole society (social legislation, labor market policy) are needed. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the effect of a weekly exercise program on short-term sick leave (less than 50 days) attributable to back pain and to determine whether changes in absenteeism were related to changes in cardiovascular fitness. Subjects were randomly assigned to an exercise group (n = 58) and a control group (n = 53). Sick leave attributable to back pain was determined in the intervention period of 1 1/2 years and a comparable 1 1/2-year period prior to the study. In the exercise group, the number of episodes of back pain and the number of sick-leave days attributable to back pain in the intervention period decreased by over 50%. Absenteeism attributable to back pain increased in the control group. The decrease in sick leave in the exercise group was not accompanied by any change in cardiovascular fitness. Suggestions for establishing exercise programs are given.
The effectiveness of physical conditioning programs in reducing sick leave when compared to usual care or other exercises in workers with back pain remains uncertain. In workers with acute back pain, these programs probably have no effect on sick leave, but there may be a positive effect on sick leave for workers with subacute and chronic back pain. Workplace involvement might improve the outcome. Better understanding of the mechanism behind physical conditioning programs and return-to-work is needed to be able to develop more effective interventions.