PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

B Koes

Publications and source records attributed to B Koes.

14 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Physical conditioning programs for workers with back and neck pain: a cochrane systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect on time lost from work of physical conditioning programs for workers with back and neck pain. DATA SOURCES Randomized trials were located by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, and PEDro. REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Where data could be pooled, meta-analysis was performed. Based on cost considerations, we nominated a mean saving of 10 sick days per year or a number needed to treat to return 1 person to work of 10 as the smallest treatment effects that would be clinically worthwhile. RESULTS: Nineteen trials in 21 publications yielded 23 contrasts relevant to this review. These trials provide evidence that physical conditioning programs that included a cognitive-behavioral approach could produce a clinically worthwhile reduction in the number of sick days taken at 12 months (average of 45 days; 95% confidence interval 3-88) when compared to general practitioner care or advice for workers with chronic back pain. There was little evidence of an effect on time lost from work of specific exercise programs that did not include a cognitive-behavioral component. CONCLUSION: Physical conditioning programs that incorporate a cognitive-behavioral approach reduce the number of sick days for workers with chronic back pain when compared to usual care.

Back Pain↗
PubMed2001

Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for subacute low back pain in working-age adults: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group.

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was performed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for subacute low back pain among working-age adults. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation programs are widely applied for patients with chronic low back pain. The multidisciplinary biopsychosocial approach for prolonged low back pain could be considered to prevent chronicity. Work site visits and a close relationship with occupational health care might produce results in terms of patients working ability. METHODS: Reviewed randomized controlled trials as well as controlled trials were identified from electronic bibliographic databases, reference checking, and consultation with experts in the rehabilitation field. Four blinded reviewers selected the trials. Two rehabilitation specialists evaluated the clinical relevance. Two other blinded reviewers extracted the data and assessed the main results along with the methodologic quality of the studies. A qualitative analysis was performed to evaluate the level evidence. RESULTS: Of 1808 references, only 2 relevant studies were included. Both were considered to be methodologically low-quality randomized controlled trials. The clinical relevance of the studies was sufficient. The level of scientific evidence was moderate, showing that multidisciplinary rehabilitation involving work site visit or more comprehensive occupational health care intervention helps patients return to work faster, makes sick leaves less, and alleviates subjective disability. CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate evidence showing that multidisciplinary rehabilitation for subacute low back pain is effective, and that work site visit increases the effectiveness, but because the analyzed studies had some methodologic shortcomings, an obvious need still exists for high-quality trials in this field.

Humans↗
PubMed2001

Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain among working age adults: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group.

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain among working age adults. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation programs for neck and shoulder pain require substantial staff and financial resources. They are widely used, despite questionable evidence of their effectiveness. METHODS: The reviewed randomized controlled and controlled trials appraising the effectiveness of biopsychosocial rehabilitation for working age patients with neck and shoulder pain were identified by searching electronic bibliographic databases, checking references, and consulting experts in the rehabilitation field. Four blinded reviewers selected the trials. Two specialists on rehabilitation evaluated the clinical relevance. Two other blinded reviewers extracted the data and assessed the main results and the methodologic quality of the studies. A qualitative analysis was performed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence. RESULTS: After 1808 abstracts and the references of 65 reviews were screened, only two relevant studies were found that satisfied the criteria. One of these was considered a methodologically low-quality randomized controlled trial, and the other was a methodologically low-quality controlled clinical trial. The clinical relevance of included studies was satisfactory. The level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain was limited. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be little scientific evidence for the effectiveness on neck and shoulder pain of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation compared with other rehabilitation methods. There is an urgent need for high-quality trials in this field.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Influence of work on the development of osteoarthritis of the hip: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence for the influence of physical workload on the occurrence of osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip. METHODS: We carried out a database search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library to identify observational studies, and articles on the relationship between workload and hip OA were identified. Methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed using a standardized set of criteria. The outcome of each study was compared with its study characteristics and methodological quality score. Finally, a best-evidence synthesis was used to summarize the results from the individual studies. RESULTS: Two retrospective cohort studies and 14 case-control studies were included in this review. There was a slight negative, but not significant association between the study outcome and the methodological quality score. Overall, moderate evidence was found for a positive association, with an odds ratio of approximately 3, between previous heavy physical workload and the occurrence of hip OA. In addition, for the subcategories, i.e., > or = 10 years farming or lifting heavy weights (> or = 25 kg), moderate evidence was found for a positive relationship with hip OA. Possible selection of the populations studied may be partly responsible for the association we identified. CONCLUSION: The evidence for the influence of previous heavy physical workload on the occurrence of hip OA is moderate.

Case-Control Studies↗
PubMed2000

Exercise therapy for low back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the cochrane collaboration back review group.

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was performed. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Exercise therapy is a widely used treatment for low back pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise therapy for low back pain with regard to pain intensity, functional status, overall improvement, and return to work. METHODS: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase, PsycLIT, and reference lists of articles were searched. Randomized trials testing all types of exercise therapy for subjects with nonspecific low back pain with or without radiation into the legs were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Because trials were considered heterogeneous with regard to study populations, interventions, and outcomes, it was decided not to perform a meta-analysis, but to summarize the results using a rating system of four levels of evidence: strong, moderate, limited, or none. RESULTS: In this review, 39 trials were identified. There is strong evidence that exercise therapy is not more effective for acute low back pain than inactive or other active treatments with which it has been compared. There is conflicting evidence on the effectiveness of exercise therapy compared with inactive treatments for chronic low back pain. Exercise therapy was more effective than usual care by the general practitioner and just as effective as conventional physiotherapy for chronic low back pain. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence summarized in this systematic review does not indicate that specific exercises are effective for the treatment of acute low back pain. Exercises may be helpful for patients with chronic low back pain to increase return to normal daily activities and work.

Exercise Therapy↗
PubMed2000

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for fibromyalgia and musculoskeletal pain in working age adults.

BACKGROUND: Non-malignant musculoskeletal pain is an increasing problem in western countries. Fibromyalgia syndrome is an increasing recognised chronic musculoskeletal disorder. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation for fibromyalgia and widespread musculoskeletal pain among working age adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: An electronic search was conducted and included Medline from 1966, PsycLIT from 1967 and EMBASE from 1980 to April 1998. The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Trials Register was searched as well as, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCTR). The references of identified articles and reviews were checked, studies published in the Finnish medical database Medic from 1978 to 1998 screened and the Science Citation Index searched. Content experts were also contacted for additional or unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: From all references found in our original search, we selected all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical controlled trials (CCTs). Trials had to assess the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation for patients suffering from fibromyalgia and widespread musculoskeletal pain among working age adults. The rehabilitation program was required to be multidisciplinary; that is, it had to consist of a physician's consultation, plus a psychological, social or vocational intervention, or a combination of both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four reviewers independently selected the RCTs and CCTs that met the specified inclusion criteria. Two experts in the field of rehabilitation evaluated the relevance and applicability of the findings of the selected studies to actual clinical use. Two other reviewers extracted the data and assessed the main results and the methodological quality of the studies using standardized forms. Finally, a qualitative analysis was performed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation. MAIN RESULTS: After screening 1808 abstracts, and the references of 65 reviews, we found only seven relevant studies (1050 patients) that met our inclusion criteria. None of these were considered, methodologically, a high quality randomized controlled trial. Four of the included RCTs on fibromyalgia were graded low quality and suggest no quantifiable benefits. The three included RCTs on widespread musculoskeletal pain showed that based on limited evidence, overall, no evidence of efficacy was observed. However, behavioral treatment and stress management appear to be important components. Education combined with physical training showed some positive effects in long term follow up. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that there appears to be little scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation for these musculoskeletal disorders. However, multidisciplinary rehabilitation is a commonly used intervention for chronic musculoskeletal disorders, which cause much personal suffering and substantial economic loss to the society. There is a need for high quality trials in this field.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for subacute low back pain among working age adults.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation programs are widely applied for chronic low back pain patients. The biopsychosocial approach for low back pain could also be considered to prevent chronicity by carrying out the rehabilitation if the acute pain is prolonged. Nevertheless multidisciplinary treatment programmes are often laborious and long processes and require good collaboration between the patient, the rehabilitation team and the work place. By workplace visits and close relationship with occupational health care one might expect results in terms of patients working ability. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation for subacute low back pain among working age adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: The reviewed studies for this structured Cochrane review were identified from electronic bibliographic databases, the Science Citation Index, reference checking and consulting experts in the rehabilitation field. The original search was planned and performed for more broad area of musculoskeletal disorders. Trials on subacute low back pain were separated afterwards. SELECTION CRITERIA: From all references found in our original search we selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs). Trials had to assess the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation for working age patients suffering from subacute low back pain (more than 4 weeks but less than 3 months). The rehabilitation program was required to be multidisciplinary, i.e.; it had to consist of a physician's consultation plus either a psychological, social or vocational intervention, or a combination of these. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four blinded reviewers selected the randomized controlled trials and controlled trials that met the specified inclusion criteria. Two experts in the field of rehabilitation evaluated the clinical relevance and applicability of the findings of the selected studies to actual clinical use. Two other blinded reviewers extracted the data and assessed the main results and the methodological quality of the studies using standardized forms. Finally, a qualitative analysis was performed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation. MAIN RESULTS: After screening 1808 abstracts, and the references of 65 reviews, we found only 2 relevant studies that satisfied our criteria on subacute low back pain. They were both considered to be methodologically low quality randomized controlled trials. The clinical relevance of included studies was sufficient. The level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation was moderate on subacute low back pain showing that multidisciplinary rehabilitation which includes workplace visit or more comprehensive occupational health care intervention helps patients to return to work faster, makes sick leaves less and alleviates subjective disability. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that there is moderate evidence of positive effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation for subacute low back pain and workplace visit increases the effectiveness. But because this evidence is based on the trials that had some methodological shortcomings and several expensive multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes are commonly used for common subacute low back problems, there is an obvious need for high quality trials in this field.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2000

Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain among working age adults.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation programs for neck and shoulder pain require substantial staff and financial resources. Despite questionable scientific evidence of their effectiveness, they are widely used. Neck and shoulder complaints are common among working age adults and they are often associated with physical work load and stress. Pain in the neck and shoulder area cause biopsychosocial difficulties for the patient especially if disability due to pain is prolonged. To help patients with biopsychosocial problems or to prevent their development, multidisciplinary biopsychosocial programs are applied on rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain patients. Nevertheless multidisciplinary treatment programmes are often laborious and rather long processes and require good collaboration between the patient, the rehabilitation team and the work place. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain among working age adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: The reviewed studies for this structured Cochrane review were identified from electronic bibliographic databases, the Science Citation Index, reference checking and consulting experts in the rehabilitation field. The original search was planned and performed for more broad area of musculoskeletal disorders. Trials on neck and shoulder pain were separated afterwards. SELECTION CRITERIA: From all references found in our original search we selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs). Trials had to assess the effectiveness of biopsychosocial rehabilitation for patients suffering from neck and shoulder pain among working age adults. The rehabilitation program was required to be multidisciplinary, i.e.; it had to consist of a physician's consultation plus either a psychological, social or vocational intervention, or a combination of these. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four blinded reviewers selected the randomized controlled trials and controlled trials that met the specified inclusion criteria. Two experts in the field of rehabilitation evaluated the clinical relevance and applicability of the findings of the selected studies to actual clinical use. Two other blinded reviewers extracted the data and assessed the main results and the methodological quality of the studies using standardized forms. Finally, a qualitative analysis was performed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation. MAIN RESULTS: After screening 1808 abstracts, and the references of 65 reviews, we found only 2 relevant studies that satisfied our criteria. One of these was considered methodologically low quality randomized controlled trial and the other one was a methodologically low quality controlled clinical trial. The clinical relevance of included studies was satisfactory. The level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation was limited for neck and shoulder pain. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that there appears to be little scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation compared with other rehabilitation facilities on neck and shoulder pain. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation is a commonly used intervention for chronic neck and shoulder complaints, therefore we see an urgent need for high quality trials in this field.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Biopsychosocial rehabilitation for upper limb repetitive strain injuries in working age adults.

BACKGROUND: Upper limb repetitive strain injury is a common problem in western countries, causing human suffering and huge economical losses. Patients with prolonged pain associated with repetitive tasks in the work place can face both psychological and physical difficulties. Different treatment programmes, physical, psychological, behavioural, social and occupational treatments have been developed and used to help these patients. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review is to determine the effectiveness of biopsychosocial rehabilitation for upper limb repetitive strain injuries among working age adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: The reviewed studies for this structured Cochrane review were identified from electronic bibliographic databases, the Science Citation Index, reference checking and consulting experts in the rehabilitation field. The original search was planned and performed for a more broad area of musculoskeletal disorders. Trials on repetitive strain injuries were separated afterwards. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and controlled trials comparing biopsychosocial measures for the treatment of repetitive upper limb strain injury in working age adults DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two experts in the field of rehabilitation evaluated the clinical relevance and applicability of the findings of the selected studies to actual clinical use. Two other blinded reviewers extracted the data and assessed the main results and the methodological quality of the studies using standardized forms. Finally, a qualitative analysis was performed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of biopsychosocial rehabilitation. MAIN RESULTS: We found only two relevant studies that satisfied our criteria. They assessed the effectiveness of two specific interventions and were both considered as low quality trials. The clinical relevance of the included studies was also unsatisfactory. The level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of biopsychosocial rehabilitation for repetitive strain injuries was limited. One small trial found that hypnosis supplementary to comprehensive treatment can decrease the intensity of pain for acute RSI in six weeks follow-up. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that presently there appears to be little scientific evidence for the effectiveness of biopsychosocial rehabilitation on repetitive strain injuries. As RCTs on more intensive and comprehensive biopsychosocial treatment programmes for RSI are lacking, there does not seem to be reliable data for these interventions. There is a need for high quality trials in this field.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

The management of chronic neck pain in general practice. A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the management in patients with chronic non-specific neck pain in general practice. DESIGN: A descriptive, questionnaire-based retrospective study. SETTING: General practices in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: 517 patients with chronic non-specific neck pain. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Nature and frequency of diagnostic procedures, therapeutic interventions and referrals by the general practitioner (GP). RESULTS: Forty-four per cent visited the GP for neck pain in the previous year. Of the patients who did visit the GP in the previous year, 32% did not receive a diagnostic modality, 31% did not receive therapy and 43% were not referred. The most frequently applied diagnostic and therapeutic modalities were physical examination (66%) and pain medication (58%), respectively. The GPs most frequently referred to a physiotherapist (51%). CONCLUSION: Once neck pain has become chronic, the minority (44%) of patients do seek help from their GP on a yearly base. In spite of the fact that the patients' conditions are non-specific and chronic, GPs still find indications for further diagnostics in two-thirds of patients. The GPs were rather consistent in their management, as the nature of the diagnostic/therapeutic modalities and referrals was similar in more than 50% of the patients.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

A report from the Second International Forum for Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain. Reexamining priorities.

STUDY DESIGN: Consensus process. OBJECTIVES: Reexamining and redirecting the research agenda for low back pain in primary care. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Most research, publications, and funding have traditionally been directed toward specialty and biologically oriented investigations of "spinal disorders" from biomedical and biomechanical perspectives. Beginning in the mid-1980s, primary care researchers began to investigate this field in earnest, focusing on lower back pain as a pain syndrome within an individual, family, and community context. Unfortunately, more progress has been made on what should not be done in diagnosing and treating lower back pain than on what should be done. METHODS: This was a modified group process designed to reach consensus among an international group of primary care lower back pain researchers. RESULTS: Nearly all of the research priorities from the initial 1995 forum are still thought to be important, although only modest progress has been made on most of them. The priorities perceived to be the most feasible to investigate and the ones in which the greatest strides have been achieved are in methodologic rather than substantive areas. Identifying subgroups of people with lower back pain is still given top ranking in 1997, but the priorities have changed dramatically. Greater emphasis is given to finding predictors and risk factors for lower back pain chronicity, improving self-care strategies, and stimulating self-reliance. New items now make up 50% of the top 10 priorities. In general, the additions reflect a greater emphasis on expanding methodologic avenues of inquiry. CONCLUSIONS: Methodologic advances, the enlistment of new techniques and disciplines, and redirected research efforts may facilitate progress in the diagnosis and treatment of lower back pain.

Group Processes↗
PubMed1998

Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use.

STUDY DESIGN: An international group of back pain researchers considered recommendations for standardized measures in clinical outcomes research in patients with back pain. OBJECTIVES: To promote more standardization of outcome measurement in clinical trials and other types of outcomes research, including meta-analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and multicenter studies. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Better standardization of outcome measurement would facilitate comparison of results among studies, and more complete reporting of relevant outcomes. Because back pain is rarely fatal or completely cured, outcome assessment is complex and involves multiple dimensions. These include symptoms, function, general well-being, work disability, and satisfaction with care. METHODS: The panel considered several factors in recommending a standard battery of outcome measures. These included reliability, validity, responsiveness, and practicality of the measures. In addition, compatibility with widely used and promoted batteries such, as the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Lumbar Cluster were considered to minimize the need for changes when these instruments are used. RESULTS: First, a six-item set was proposed, which is sufficiently brief that it could be used in routine care settings for quality improvement and for research purposes. An expanded outcome set, which would provide more precise measurement for research purposes, includes measures of severity and frequency of symptoms, either the Roland or the Oswestry Disability Scale, either the SF-12 or the EuroQol measure of general health status, a question about satisfaction with symptoms, three types of "disability days," and an optional single item on overall satisfaction with medical care. CONCLUSION: Standardized measurement of outcomes would facilitate scientific advances in clinical care. A short, 6-item questionnaire and a somewhat expanded, more precise battery of questionnaires can be recommended. Although many considerations support such recommendations, more data on responsiveness and the minimally important change in scores are needed for most of the instruments.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗