Economic Evaluation of a Multi-Stage Return to Work Program for Workers on Sick-Leave Due to Low Back Pain

被引:0
作者
Ivan A. Steenstra
Johannes R. Anema
Maurits W. van Tulder
Paulien M. Bongers
Henrica C. W. de Vet
Willem van Mechelen
机构
[1] VU University Medical Center,Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine
[2] VU University Medical Center,Department of Public and Occupational Health
[3] TNO Work and Employment,Body@Work
[4] Research Center Physical Activity,Institute for Health Sciences
[5] Work and Health,undefined
[6] TNO-VU,undefined
[7] VU University,undefined
[8] Institute for Work and Health,undefined
来源
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation | 2006年 / 16卷
关键词
Low back pain; Operant behavioural; Participative Ergonomics; Return to work; Randomized Controlled Trial; Cost-effectiveness; Occupational health;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a return to work (RTW) program for workers on sick-leave due to low back pain (LBP), comparing a workplace intervention implemented between 2 to 8 weeks of sick-leave with usual care, and a clinical intervention after 8 weeks of sick-leave with usual care. Design: Economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Study population: Workers sick-listed for a period of 2 to 6 weeks due to LBP. Interventions: 1. workplace assessment, work modifications and case management). 2. physiotherapy based on operant behavioural principles. 3. usual care: provided by an occupational physician. Outcomes: The primary outcome was return to work (RTW). Other outcomes were pain intensity, functional status, quality of life and general health. The economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective. Outcomes were assessed at baseline (after 2–6 weeks on sick-leave), and 12 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks after the first day of sick-leave. Results: The workplace intervention group returned to work 30.0 days (95% CI=[3.1, 51.3]) earlier on average than the usual care group at slightly higher direct costs (ratio of 1 day: €19). Workers in the clinical intervention group that had received usual care in the first 8 weeks returned to work 21.3 days (95% CI= [−74.1, 29.2]) later on average. The group that had received the workplace intervention in the first 8 weeks and the clinical intervention after 8 weeks returned to work 50.9 days (95% CI=[−89.4, −2.7]) later on average. A workplace intervention was more effective than usual care in RTW at slightly higher costs and was equally effective as usual care at equal costs on other outcomes. A clinical intervention was less effective than usual care and associated with higher costs. Conclusion: The workplace intervention results in a safe and faster RTW than usual care at reasonable costs for workers on sick-leave for two to six weeks due to LBP.
引用
收藏
页码:557 / 578
页数:21
相关论文
共 160 条
[1]  
Frymoyer JW(1991)An Overview of the Incidences and Costs of Low Back Pain Orthop Clin North Am 22 263-71
[2]  
Cats-Baril WL(2000)The Economic Burden of Back Pain in the UK Pain 84 95-103
[3]  
Maniadakis N(1995)A Cost-of-Illness Study of Back Pain in The Netherlands Pain 62 233-40
[4]  
Gray A(1999)Indirect Costs of Back Pain in the Netherlands: a Comparison of the Human Capital Method With the Friction Cost Method Pain 80 201-7
[5]  
van Tulder MW(1994)The Economic Impact of Musculoskeletal Disorders Qual Life Res 3 85-91
[6]  
Koes BW(1987)Importance and Economic Burden of Occupational Back Pain: a Study of 2,500 Cases Representative of Quebec J Occup Med 29 670-4
[7]  
Bouter LM(2005)Effectiveness of a Return-to-Work Intervention for Subacute Low-Back Pain Scand J Work Environ Health 31 249-57
[8]  
Hutubessy RC(2005)Intervention for Return to Work–What Is Really Effective? Scand J Work Environ Health 31 245-7
[9]  
van Tulder MW(1987)Report of the Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders Spine 12 1-59
[10]  
Vondeling H(1994)Is Back Pain Increasing? Results From National Surveys in Finland During 1978/9-1992 Scand J Rheumatol 23 269-76