Efficiency of three treatment strategies on occupational and quality of life impairments for chronic low back pain patients: is the multidisciplinary approach the key feature to success?

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of three treatment strategies for chronic low back pain with varying biomechanical intensity and multidisciplinary approach. METHODS: A monocentric randomized controlled trial with a 12-months follow-up, conducted in the French Valley Loire region from May 2009 to April 2013. Participants were working-aged patients with chronic low back pain referred to a French chronic low back pain care-network to support medical and occupational issues. Three treatment strategies, each for five weeks were compared: (i) intensive and multidisciplinary program conducted in a rehabilitation center; (ii) less intensive outpatient program conducted by a trained private physiotherapist; (iii) mixed strategy combining the same outpatient program associated with a weekly multidisciplinary intervention. The effects of treatment conditions were compared using an "intention to treat" approach: Number of days' sick leave during the 12-months following treatment, and quality of life and social ability assessed by auto-questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 159 patients (58.9% men, 41.5 ± 10.3 years old, median duration of sick leave = 221.0 days (127.5-319.0)) were included. Sick leave duration significantly decreased during the 12-months following treatment in the three groups. There was no significant difference for the evolution of participants' quality of life, social ability, and personal beliefs between the three groups. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that disparate treatments might show similar effectiveness because they could all work through concomitant changes in beliefs, attitudes, and coping mechanisms. The original mixed strategy can treat a larger number of chronic low back pain patients, at a lower cost and provide local community-based care. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02030171.

Effectiveness of three treatment strategies on occupational limitations and quality of life for patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: Is a multidisciplinary approach the key feature to success: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is a significant public health problem, being the primary cause of work absenteeism, as well as affecting sufferers' quality of life, in industrialized society. International guidelines recommend intensive multidisciplinary approaches for patients with cLBP. However, these costly and time-consuming programs can only be offered to a minority of the most heavily affected patients and therefore do not seem likely to respond to public health requirements. Lighter programs may be an alternative to full time hospital-based programs with valuable results in terms of disability and occupational activity for cLBP patients. It is therefore important to define both what the determining components of management to improve activity restriction are and how to treat a larger number of patients more effectively at a lower cost. The aim of this study is to compare three programs with various levels of intensity and multidisciplinary. METHODS/DESIGN: This paper describes the protocol for a prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial in working aged patients with cLBP. Three treatment strategies are compared: (1) intensive and multidisciplinary program conducted in a rehabilitation center; (2) less intensive outpatient program conducted by a private physiotherapist; (3) mixed strategy combining the same out program with a multidisciplinary intervention. The primary outcome of the trial is the impact of the mixed strategy on being able to work compared to hospital centered-program and out program. The secondary outcome is the impact of the mixed strategy on quality of life and social ability compared to the two others programs. The intervention part of the trial programs will take 5 weeks and observational follow-up will take 12 months. The sample size will be 180 participants (60 for each arm). The project has been approved by the Ethical Committee of Angers Hospital, France. DISCUSSION: On the hypothesis that a multidisciplinary approach is the key feature to programs success in reducing social and occupational impairment in cLBP patients, we suggest that it is possible to achieve the same results with less intensive strategies if a multidisciplinary approach is maintained. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials NCT02030171.

Multidisciplinary intensive functional restoration versus outpatient active physiotherapy in chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized parallel group comparative trial with a 1-year follow-up period. OBJECTIVE: To compare in a population of patients with chronic low back pain, the effectiveness of a functional restoration program (FRP), including intensive physical training and a multidisciplinary approach, with an outpatient active physiotherapy program at 1-year follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Controlled studies conducted in the United States and in Northern Europe showed a benefit of FRPs, especially on return to work. Randomized studies have compared these programs with standard care. A previously reported study presented the effectiveness at 6 months of both functional restoration and active physiotherapy, with a significantly greater reduction of sick-leave days for functional restoration. METHODS: A total of 132 patients with low back pain were randomized to either FRP (68 patients) or active individual therapy (64 patients). One patient did not complete the FRP; 19 patients were lost to follow-up (4 in the FRP group and 15 in the active individual treatment group). The number of sick-leave days in 2 years before the program was similar in both groups (180 ± 135.1 days in active individual treatment vs. 185 ± 149.8 days in FRP, P = 0.847). RESULTS: In both groups, at 1-year follow-up, intensity of pain, flexibility, trunk muscle endurance, Dallas daily activities and work and leisure scores, and number of sick-leave days were significantly improved compared with baseline. The number of sick-leave days was significantly lower in the FRP group. CONCLUSION: Both programs are efficient in reducing disability and sick-leave days. The FRP is significantly more effective in reducing sick-leave days. Further analysis is required to determine if this overweighs the difference in costs of both programs.

Comparison of a functional restoration program with active individual physical therapy for patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term outcomes of active individual therapy (AIT) with those of a functional restoration program (FRP). DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled study. SETTING: Two rehabilitation centers and private ambulatory physiotherapy facilities. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty-two adults with chronic low back pain. Fifty-one percent of patients on sick leave or out of work (mean duration, 180d in the 2y before treatment). INTERVENTIONS: For 5 weeks, FRP (at 25h/wk) or AIT (at 3h/wk). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Trunk flexibility, back flexor, and extensor endurance (Ito and Sorensen tests), general endurance, pain intensity, Dallas Pain Questionnaire (DPQ) scores, daily activities, anxiety depression, social interest, and work and leisure activities, and self-reported improvement (work ability, resumption of sport and leisure activities). RESULTS: All outcome measures improved after treatment except endurance in AIT. There was no between-group difference for pain intensity or DPQ daily activities or work and leisure activities scores. Better results were observed in FRP for all other outcome measures. There was a significant effect of treatment and the initial value for the gain of the Sorensen score with a treatment or initial value interaction; a significant effect of treatment and initial value on the gains of Ito, endurance, and DPQ social interest and anxiety depression scores, with no treatment or initial value interaction; and a significant effect of initial value but not treatment for the gains of DPQ daily activities and work and leisure activities scores. CONCLUSIONS: Low-cost ambulatory AIT is effective. The main advantage of FRP is improved endurance. We speculate that this may be linked to better self-reported work ability and more frequent resumption of sports and leisure activities.

Effects of functional restoration versus 3 hours per week physical therapy: a randomized controlled study.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized parallel-group comparative trial with a 6-month follow-up period. OBJECTIVE: To compare, in chronic low back pain patients, the effectiveness of a functional restoration program, including intensive physical training, occupational therapy, and psychological support to an active individual therapy consisting of 3 hours physical therapy per week during 5 weeks. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Controlled studies conducted in the United States showed a benefit of functional restoration in patients with low back pain, especially on return to work. Randomized Canadian and European trials had less favorable results. In France, there has been up to now no randomized study. Controlled studies suggested a positive effect of functional restoration programs. METHODS: Eighty-six patients with low back pain were randomized to either the functional restoration (44 patients) or the active individual therapy (42 patients) program. One person in each group never started the program. Two patients did not complete the functional restoration program, and one was lost to follow-up at 6 months. The mean number of sick-leave days in the 2 previous years was 6 months. RESULTS: After adjustment on the variable "workplace enrolled in an ergonomic program", the mean number of sick-leave days was significantly lower in the functional restoration group. Physical criteria and treatment appreciation were also better. There was no significant difference in the intensity of pain, the quality of life and functional indexes, the psychological characteristics, the number of contacts with the medical system, and the drug intake. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the effectiveness of a functional restoration program on important outcome measures, such as sick leave, in a country that has a social system that protects people facing difficulties at work.