IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0172003.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can group-based reassuring information alter low back pain behavior? A cluster-randomized controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Pernille Frederiksen
  • Aage Indahl
  • Lars L Andersen
  • Kim Burton
  • Rasmus Hertzum-Larsen
  • Tom Bendix

Abstract

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is common in the population and multifactorial in nature, often involving negative consequences. Reassuring information to improve coping is recommended for reducing the negative consequences of LBP. Adding a simple non-threatening explanation for the pain (temporary muscular dysfunction) has been successful at altering beliefs and behavior when delivered with other intervention elements. This study investigates the isolated effect of this specific information on future occupational behavior outcomes when delivered to the workforce. Design: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. Methods: Publically employed workers (n = 505) from 11 Danish municipality centers were randomized at center-level (cluster) to either intervention (two 1-hour group-based talks at the workplace) or control. The talks provided reassuring information together with a simple non-threatening explanation for LBP—the ‘functional-disturbance’-model. Data collections took place monthly over a 1-year period using text message tracking (SMS). Primary outcomes were self-reported days of cutting down usual activities and work participation. Secondary outcomes were self-reported back beliefs, work ability, number of healthcare visits, bothersomeness, restricted activity, use of pain medication, and sadness/depression. Results: There was no between-group difference in the development of LBP during follow-up. Cumulative logistic regression analyses showed no between-group difference on days of cutting down activities, but increased odds for more days of work participation in the intervention group (OR = 1.83 95% CI: 1.08–3.12). Furthermore, the intervention group was more likely to report: higher work ability, reduced visits to healthcare professionals, lower bothersomeness, lower levels of sadness/depression, and positive back beliefs. Conclusion: Reassuring information involving a simple non-threatening explanation for LBP significantly increased the odds for days of work participation and higher work ability among workers who went on to experience LBP during the 12-month follow-up. Our results confirm the potential for public-health education for LBP, and add to the discussion of simple versus multidisciplinary interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Pernille Frederiksen & Aage Indahl & Lars L Andersen & Kim Burton & Rasmus Hertzum-Larsen & Tom Bendix, 2017. "Can group-based reassuring information alter low back pain behavior? A cluster-randomized controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0172003
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0172003
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0172003&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0172003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthias Bethge & Friedrich Radoschewski, 2012. "Adverse effects of effort–reward imbalance on work ability: longitudinal findings from the German Sociomedical Panel of Employees," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 57(5), pages 797-805, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Melanie Ebener & Hans Martin Hasselhorn, 2019. "Validation of Short Measures of Work Ability for Research and Employee Surveys," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Chamnong Thanapop & Sasina Jit-akson & Dusanee Suwankhong & Irniza Rasdi & Warangkana Chankong & Sasithorn Thanapop, 2023. "Work Ability, Work-Related Health, and Effort–Reward Imbalance: A Cross-Sectional Study among University Staff during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Thailand," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-14, April.
    3. Katja Spanier & Elliot Michel & Elke Peters & Friedrich Michael Radoschewski & Matthias Bethge, 2018. "Injustice at work affects work ability and role functioning: findings of a cohort study," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 63(4), pages 447-456, May.
    4. Petr Hlaďo & Jaroslava Dosedlová & Klára Harvánková & Petr Novotný & Jaroslav Gottfried & Karel Rečka & Markéta Petrovová & Bohumil Pokorný & Ilona Štorová, 2020. "Work Ability among Upper-Secondary School Teachers: Examining the Role of Burnout, Sense of Coherence, and Work-Related and Lifestyle Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-23, December.
    5. Brussig Martin & Karačić Anemari & Kraetsch Clemens & Zapfel Stefan, 2021. "Handlungsansätze in Modellprojekten des Bundesprogramms „Innovative Wege zur Teilhabe am Arbeitsleben – rehapro“: Eine Inhaltsanalyse der Anträge bewilligter Projekte," Arbeit, De Gruyter, vol. 30(1), pages 21-42, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0172003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.