Biomedical subjects

Kaija Karjalainen

Publications and source records attributed to Kaija Karjalainen.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2004

Mini-intervention for subacute low back pain: two-year follow-up and modifiers of effectiveness.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVES: To Investigate the long-term effectiveness, costs, and effect modifiers of a mini-intervention, provided in addition to the usual care, and the incremental effect of a worksite visit for patients with subacute disabling low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A mini-intervention was earlier proved to be an effective treatment for subacute LBP. Whether the beneficial effect is sustained is not known. Furthermore, modifiers of a treatment effect are largely unknown. METHODS: A total of 164 patients with subacute LBP randomized into a mini-intervention (A, n = 56), a mini-intervention plus a worksite visit (B, n = 51), or the usual care (C, n = 57). Mini-intervention consisted of a detailed assessment of the patients' history, beliefs, and physical findings by a physician and a physiotherapist, followed by recommendations and advice. The usual care patients received the conventional care. Pain, disability, health-related quality of life, satisfaction with care, days on sick leave, and health care consumption and costs were measured during a 24-month follow-up. Thirteen candidate modifiers were tested for each outcome. RESULTS: There were no differences between the three treatment arms regarding the intensity of pain, the perceived disability, or the health-related quality of life. However, mini-intervention decreased occurrence of daily (A vs., C, P = 0.01) and bothersome (A vs. C, P < 0.05) pain and increased treatment satisfaction. Costs resulting from LBP were lower in the intervention groups (A 4670 Euros, B 5990 Euros) than in C (C 9510 Euros) (A vs. C, P = 0.04; and B vs. C, not significant). The average number of days on sick leave was 30 in A, 45 in B, and 62 in C (A vs. C, P = 0.03; B vs. C, not significant). The perceived risk for not recovering was the strongest modifier of treatment effect. Mental and mental-physical workers in A and B were less often on sick leave than those in C. CONCLUSIONS: Mini-intervention is an effective treatment for subacute LBP. Despite lack of a significant effect on intensity of low back pain and perceived disability, mini-intervention, including proper recommendations and advice, according to the "active approach," is able to reduce LBP-related costs. The perceived risk of not recovering was the strongest modifier of treatment effect. In alleviating pain, the intervention was most effective among the patients with a high perceived risk of not recovering.

Absenteeism↗

PubMed2003

Outcome determinants of subacute low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive prognostic study. OBJECTIVES: To identify outcome determinants of subacute low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The factors predicting recovery from prolonged back pain among working adults are largely unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-four employed patients with subacute (duration of pain 4-12 weeks) daily low back pain were recruited from primary health care to a randomized study. Data on potential predictive factors were collected before randomization. In multiple regressions using repeated measures analysis, the treatment received was adjusted when determining the impact of the predictive factors. Dependent outcome variables used were pain, perceived functional disability, generic health-related quality of life, satisfaction with care, days on sick leave, use of health care, and costs of health care consumption measured, at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Age and intensity of pain at baseline predicted most of the outcomes. The perceived risk of not recovering was a stronger determinant of outcome than gender, education, or self-rated health status (which did not have any predictive value) or body mass index, expectations of treatment effect, satisfaction with work, or the presence of radicular symptoms below the knee (only slight predictive value). The only factors predicting the duration of sick leave were the duration of sick leave at baseline and the type of occupation. CONCLUSION: Age and intensity of pain are the strongest predictors of outcome. Accumulation of days on sick leave is predicted by the duration of sick leave at entry and the type of work, but not by pain, perceived disability, or satisfaction with work.

Absenteeism↗

PubMed2003

Mini-intervention for subacute low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effectiveness and costs of a mini-intervention, provided in addition to the usual care, and the incremental effect of a work site visit for patients with subacute disabling low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is lack of data on cost-effectiveness of brief interventions for patients with prolonged low back pain. METHODS: A total of 164 patients with subacute low back pain were randomized to a mini-intervention group (A), a work site visit group (B), or a usual care group (C). Groups A (n = 56) and B (n = 51) underwent one assessment by a physician plus a physiotherapist. Group B received a work site visit in addition. Group C served as controls (n = 57) and was treated in municipal primary health care. All patients received a leaflet on back pain. Pain, disability, specific and generic health-related quality of life, satisfaction with care, days on sick leave, and use and costs of health care consumption were measured at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. RESULTS: During follow-up, fewer subjects had daily pain in Groups A and B than in Group C (Group A Group C, = 0.002; Group B Group C, = 0.030). In Group A, pain was less bothersome (Group A Group C, = 0.032) and interfered less with daily life (Group A Group C, = 0.040) than among controls. Average days on sick leave were 19 in Group A, 28 in Group B, and 41 in Group C (Group A Group C, = 0.019). Treatment satisfaction was better in the intervention groups than among the controls, and costs were lowest in the mini-intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: Mini-intervention reduced daily back pain symptoms and sickness absence, improved adaptation to pain and patient satisfaction among patients with subacute low back pain, without increasing health care costs. A work site visit did not increase effectiveness.

Acute Disease↗