Differences in outcome of a multidisciplinary treatment between subgroups of chronic low back pain patients defined using two multiaxial assessment instruments: the Multidimensional Pain Inventory and lumbar dynamometry

被引:47
作者
Vollenbroek-Hutten, MMR
Hermens, HJ
Wever, D
Gorter, M
Rinket, J
IJzerman, MJ
机构
[1] Roessingh Res & Dev, NL-7752 AH Enschede, Netherlands
[2] Rehabil Ctr Het Roessingh, Enschede, Netherlands
[3] Roessingh Dienstengrp, Enschede, Netherlands
关键词
D O I
10.1191/0269215504cr772oa
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Objective: To investigate the effects of a multidisciplinary back school programme (Roessingh Back Rehabilitation Programme, RRP) compared with usual care, as well as differences in treatment outcome between subgroups defined using two multiaxial assessment instruments: the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI-DLV) and lumbar dynamometry. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Rehabilitation. Subjects: One hundred and sixty-three patients with chronic, aspecific low back pain. Intervention: All subjects were randomly assigned either to a multidisciplinary, physically oriented group treatment or to their usual care. Main outcome measures: The Roland Disability Questionnaire and health-related quality of life (EuroQol, EQ5-D) were measured as primary outcomes before randomization and after eight weeks and six months follow-up. Result: Only 30-50% of the patients in the RRP group showed improvement and this number is not significantly different from the control group. Subgroup analyses give some first indications that multiaxial measurement instruments can be used to identify subgroups with differences in treatment effects. Conclusion: The overall effect of a multidisciplinary treatment is disappointing, however multiaxial assessment before admission might be valuable in clinical practice, resulting in more effective treatments for patients with chronic low back pain.
引用
收藏
页码:566 / 579
页数:14
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2000, COCHRANE LIB
[2]  
ARRINDEL WA, 1986, SCL 90 HANDELEIDING
[3]   SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE - CONCEPTUAL FORMULATION AND METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A HEALTH STATUS MEASURE [J].
BERGNER, M ;
BOBBITT, RA ;
KRESSEL, S ;
POLLARD, WE ;
GILSON, BS ;
MORRIS, JR .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH SERVICES, 1976, 6 (03) :393-415
[4]   Responsiveness of general health status in chronic low back pain: a comparison of the COOP Charts and the SF-36 [J].
Bronfort, G ;
Bouter, LM .
PAIN, 1999, 83 (02) :201-209
[5]   EuroQol: The current state of play [J].
Brooks, R .
HEALTH POLICY, 1996, 37 (01) :53-72
[6]  
DEROGATIS L, 1983, SCL 90R MANUAL, V2
[7]  
DEUTSCH SD, 1991, B200 BACK EVALUATION, P41
[8]  
DEYO RA, 1988, ARCH PHYS MED REHAB, V69, P1044
[9]   EFFICACY OF COMPREHENSIVE REHABILITATION PROGRAMS AND BACK SCHOOL FOR PATIENTS WITH LOW-BACK-PAIN - A METAANALYSIS [J].
DIFABIO, RP .
PHYSICAL THERAPY, 1995, 75 (10) :865-878
[10]   Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states [J].
Dolan, P .
MEDICAL CARE, 1997, 35 (11) :1095-1108