Hlobil Hynek, Staal J Bart, Spoelstra Maaike, Ariëns Geertje A M, Smid Tjabe, van Mechelen Willem
Department of Public and Occupational Health, Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2005 Aug;31(4):249-57. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.880.
The effectiveness of return-to-work intervention for subacute low-back pain on work absenteeism, pain severity, and functional status was examined by means of a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Publications in English that met the selection criteria were identified in a computer-aided search and assessed for methodological quality. A best-evidence synthesis was performed instead of statistical data pooling, because of the heterogeneity of the interventions and study populations. Five of nine studies comparing return-to-work intervention with usual care were identified as methodologically high-quality studies. Strong evidence was found for the effectiveness of return to work intervention on the return-to-work rate after 6 months and for the effectiveness of return-to-work intervention on the reduction of days of absence from work after > or = 12 months. It can be concluded that return-to-work interventions are equal or more effective regarding absence from work due to subacute low-back pain than usual care is.
通过对随机对照试验的系统评价,研究了亚急性下背痛重返工作干预对工作缺勤、疼痛严重程度和功能状态的有效性。通过计算机辅助检索,确定了符合入选标准的英文出版物,并对其方法学质量进行了评估。由于干预措施和研究人群的异质性,进行了最佳证据综合分析,而不是统计数据合并。在比较重返工作干预与常规护理的9项研究中,有5项被确定为方法学高质量研究。有强有力的证据表明,重返工作干预对6个月后的重返工作率有效,且对≥12个月后减少缺勤天数有效。可以得出结论,对于因亚急性下背痛导致的缺勤,重返工作干预与常规护理相比同样有效或更有效。