Dataset Information

Rehabilitation access and effectiveness for persons with back pain: the protocol of a cohort study (REHAB-BP, DRKS00011554).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Back pain is one of the most common chronic diseases in Germany and has a major impact on work ability and social participation. The German Pension Insurance (GPI) is the main provider of medical rehabilitation to improve work ability and prevent disability pensions in Germany. However, over half of the persons granted a disability pension have never used a medical rehabilitation service. Furthermore, evidence on the effects of medical rehabilitation in Germany is inconclusive. Consequently, this study has two aims: first, to determine barriers to using rehabilitation services, and second, to examine the effectiveness of medical rehabilitation in German residents with chronic back pain.

Methods

In 2017 a postal questionnaire will be sent to 45,000 persons aged 45 to 59 years whose pension insurance contributions are managed by the GPI North or the GPI Central Germany. In 2019 respondents who report back pain in the first survey (n = 5760 expected) will be sent a second questionnaire. Individuals will be eligible for the first survey if they are employed, have neither used nor applied for a rehabilitation programme during the last 4 years and neither received nor applied for a disability pension. The sample will be drawn randomly from the registers of the GPI North (n = 22,500) and the GPI Central Germany (n = 22,500) and stratified by sex and duration of sickness absence benefits. Barriers to rehabilitation services will be related to socio-demographic and social characteristics, pain and attitudes to pain, health and health behaviour, healthcare utilisation, experiences and cognitions about rehabilitation services and job conditions. Propensity score matched analyses will be used to examine the effectiveness of rehabilitation services. Data on use of medical rehabilitation will be extracted from administrative records. The primary outcome is pain disability. Secondary outcomes are pain intensity and days of disability, pain self-efficacy, fear avoidance beliefs, self-rated health, depression, healthcare utilisation, self-rated work ability and subjective prognosis of employability, sickness absence benefits, and disability pensions.

Discussion

This study identifies barriers to use of rehabilitation services and determines the effectiveness of medical rehabilitation for patients with chronic back pain.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00011554 , January 26, 2017).

SUBMITTER: Bethge M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5512943 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMillions of people in Germany suffer from chronic pain, in which course and intensity are multifactorial. Besides physical injuries, certain psychosocial risk factors are involved in the disease process. The national health care guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-specific low back pain recommend the screening of psychosocial risk factors as early as possible, to be able to adapt the therapy to patient needs (e.g., unimodal or multimodal). However, such a procedure has been difficult to implement in practice and has not yet been integrated into the rehabilitation care structures across the country.MethodsThe aim of this study is to implement an individualized therapy and aftercare program within the rehabilitation offer of the German Pension Insurance in the area of orthopedics and to examine its success and sustainability in comparison to the previous standard aftercare program. The study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial including 1204 patients from six orthopedic rehabilitation clinics. A 2:1 allocation ratio to intervention (individualized and home-based rehabilitation aftercare) versus the control group (regular outpatient rehabilitation aftercare) is set. Upon admission to the rehabilitation clinic, participants in the intervention group will be screened according to their psychosocial risk profile. They could then receive either unimodal or multimodal, together with an individualized training program. The program is instructed in the clinic (approximately 3 weeks) and will continue independently at home afterwards for 3 months. The success of the program is examined by means of a total of four surveys. The co-primary outcomes are the Characteristic Pain Intensity and Disability Score assessed by the German version of the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire (CPG).DiscussionAn improvement in terms of pain, work ability, patient compliance, and acceptance in our intervention program compared to the standard aftercare is expected. The study contributes to provide individualized care also to patients living far away from clinical centers.Trial registrationDRKS, DRKS00020373 . Registered on 15 April 2020.

Project description:BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Physical exercise, as a treatment, is beneficial for the improvement of quality of life in patients with LBP, and it is widely accepted.ObjectiveWe aimed to develop a protocol for a feasibility study that is designed to compare the effectiveness of different interventions in reducing pain, functional, and psychosocial factors among patients with chronic LBP after 8 weeks of randomization.MethodsThis is a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial that will consist of individuals with chronic LBP who are aged between 18 and 65 years. Participants will be allocated, through block randomization, to one of the following groups: the motor control exercises (MCEs), pain education, MCEs+pain education, and usual care groups. The primary outcome will be pain intensity, and the secondary outcomes will be the pressure pain threshold, which will be measured with a digital algometer; LBP-related disability; fears and beliefs; the fear of movement; quality of life; mood states; and levels of depression and anxiety. The trial was approved by the ethics committee for research involving human beings of the Federal University of Pelotas (reference number: 5.717.390) in September 2022, and it will be conducted until August 2023.ResultsThe researchers are being trained to apply the questionnaires and carry out the interventions. Patient recruitment will begin at the end of 2022 and results are expected to be achieved by August 2023.ConclusionsOur trial will provide preliminary data regarding the feasibility and safety of MCEs and pain education for patients with LBP. It will also provide preliminary outcome data that can be used to identify the most efficient intervention and the level of health care that should be implemented in public health services.Trial registrationBrazilian Registry of Clinical Trials U1111-1221-4106; https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-2xx2r2/.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/31345.

Project description:IntroductionThe relevance of rehabilitation in progressive neurological disorders, such as Friedreich's Ataxia (FRDA), has yet to be convincingly proven. FRDA is characterized by ataxia, loss of gait, scoliosis, cardiomyopathy, dysarthria and dysphagia, with reduced life expectancy. The disease onset is usually in adolescence, leading to progressive disability. Omaveloxolone has been recently approved as the first pharmacological treatment for FRDA in adults and adolescents aged 16 years and older. Regarding non-pharmacological therapies, neurorehabilitation is a valuable aid in addressing the symptoms and in maintaining the residual functioning. We performed a prospective observational cohort study to evaluate the efficacy of inpatient rehabilitation (IR) for people with FRDA.MethodsA total of 42 individuals (29 adults and 13 children) with FRDA were recruited. There were 27 ambulant and 15 non-ambulant participants. The patients underwent IR of 3 and 4 weeks in children and adults, respectively. The IR treatment was designed to be applied within a multidisciplinary setting, so FRDA patients underwent, in addition to physiotherapy, also occupational therapy, practical manual activities and psychological support aiming to enhance transferable skills useful in the activities of daily living. The primary outcome was the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA). Other measures were: Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale (FARS) and Nine Hole Peg Test (NHPT). Furthermore, we used the 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT), the Timed Up and Go (TUG) and the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) only on ambulant subjects. Outcomes were evaluated at baseline and at the end of the treatment.ResultsWe report that the IR significantly improves motor performance and ataxia symptoms in patients with FRDA. Our study shows significant functional improvement in all the outcome measures used, except for NHPT bilaterally. FARS and SARA scores post-IR are significatively reduced when compared (p < 0.001).DiscussionWe demonstrate that IR programs in FRDA can provide a meaningful clinical improvement in terms of outcome measures. These findings could be useful when approaching progressive neurological disorders.

Project description:Low back pain (LBP) is a common and disabling disorder in western society. The management of LBP comprises a range of different intervention strategies including surgery, drug therapy, and non-medical interventions. The objective of the present study is to determine the effectiveness of physical and rehabilitation interventions (i.e. exercise therapy, back school, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), low level laser therapy, education, massage, behavioural treatment, traction, multidisciplinary treatment, lumbar supports, and heat/cold therapy) for chronic LBP. The primary search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro up to 22 December 2008. Existing Cochrane reviews for the individual interventions were screened for studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. The search strategy outlined by the Cochrane Back Review Groups (CBRG) was followed. The following were included for selection criteria: (1) randomized controlled trials, (2) adult (? 18 years) population with chronic (? 12 weeks) non-specific LBP, and (3) evaluation of at least one of the main clinically relevant outcome measures (pain, functional status, perceived recovery, or return to work). Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data on study characteristics, risk of bias, and outcomes at short, intermediate, and long-term follow-up. The GRADE approach was used to determine the quality of evidence. In total 83 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria: exercise therapy (n = 37), back school (n = 5), TENS (n = 6), low level laser therapy (n = 3), behavioural treatment (n = 21), patient education (n = 1), traction (n = 1), and multidisciplinary treatment (n = 6). Compared to usual care, exercise therapy improved post-treatment pain intensity and disability, and long-term function. Behavioural treatment was found to be effective in reducing pain intensity at short-term follow-up compared to no treatment/waiting list controls. Finally, multidisciplinary treatment was found to reduce pain intensity and disability at short-term follow-up compared to no treatment/waiting list controls. Overall, the level of evidence was low. Evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrates that there is low quality evidence for the effectiveness of exercise therapy compared to usual care, there is low evidence for the effectiveness of behavioural therapy compared to no treatment and there is moderate evidence for the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary treatment compared to no treatment and other active treatments at reducing pain at short-term in the treatment of chronic low back pain. Based on the heterogeneity of the populations, interventions, and comparison groups, we conclude that there are insufficient data to draw firm conclusion on the clinical effect of back schools, low-level laser therapy, patient education, massage, traction, superficial heat/cold, and lumbar supports for chronic LBP.

Project description:BackgroundIn Germany, a multidisciplinary rehabilitation named "behavioural medical rehabilitation" (BMR) is available for treatment of chronic low back pain (clbp). A central component of BMR is standard exercise therapy (SET), which is directed mainly to improve physical fitness. There is a need to address psychosocial factors within SET and therefore to improve behavior change with a focus on the development of self-management skills in dealing with clbp. Furthermore, short-term effectiveness of BMR with a SET has been proven, but the impact of a behavioural exercise therapy (BET) for improvement of the long-term effectiveness of BMR is unclear.Methods/designTo compare the effectiveness of two exercise programs with different approaches within BMR on the effects of BMR a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) in two rehabilitation centres will be performed. 214 patients aged 18-65 with clbp will be, based on an "urn randomisation"-algorithm, randomly assigned to a BMR with SET (function-oriented, n=107) and BMR with BET (behaviour-oriented, n=107). Both exercise programs have a mean duration of 26 hours in three weeks and are delivered by a limited number of not-blinded study therapists in closed groups with six to twelve patients who will be masked regarding study group. The main differences of BET lie in its detailed manualised program with a theory-based, goal-orientated combination of exercise, education and behavioural elements, active participation of patients and consideration of their individual preferences and previous experiences with exercise. The primary outcome is functional ability assessed with the Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire directly before and after the rehabilitation program, as well as a six and twelve-month follow-up.DiscussionThis RCT is designed to explore the effects of BET on the effectiveness of a BMR compared to a BMR with SET in the management of patients with clbp. Methodological challenges arise from conducting a RCT within routine health care as well as from ensuring high treatment integrity. Findings of this study might contribute to a better understanding of the mechanism of action of BMR and the special effects of BET and may be used to improve the quality of these interventions in routine care, therefore reducing the burden to patients with disabling clbp.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trials NCT01666639.