↓ Skip to main content

Cost of low back pain in Switzerland in 2005

Overview of attention for article published in HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, June 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
160 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
230 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Cost of low back pain in Switzerland in 2005
Published in
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, June 2010
DOI 10.1007/s10198-010-0258-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon Wieser, Bruno Horisberger, Sara Schmidhauser, Claudia Eisenring, Urs Brügger, Andreas Ruckstuhl, Jürg Dietrich, Anne F. Mannion, Achim Elfering, Özgür Tamcan, Urs Müller

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) is the most prevalent health problem in Switzerland and a leading cause of reduced work performance and disability. This study estimated the total cost of LBP in Switzerland in 2005 from a societal perspective using a bottom-up prevalence-based cost-of-illness approach. The study considers more cost categories than are typically investigated and includes the costs associated with a multitude of LBP sufferers who are not under medical care. The findings are based on a questionnaire completed by a sample of 2,507 German-speaking respondents, of whom 1,253 suffered from LBP in the last 4 weeks; 346 of them were receiving medical treatment for their LBP. Direct costs of LBP were estimated at <euro>2.6 billion and direct medical costs at 6.1% of the total healthcare expenditure in Switzerland. Productivity losses were estimated at <euro>4.1 billion with the human capital approach and <euro>2.2 billion with the friction cost approach. Presenteeism was the single most prominent cost category. The total economic burden of LBP to Swiss society was between 1.6 and 2.3% of GDP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 3 1%
United States 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 224 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 18%
Student > Bachelor 40 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 13%
Researcher 25 11%
Student > Postgraduate 13 6%
Other 34 15%
Unknown 46 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 14%
Engineering 14 6%
Sports and Recreations 11 5%
Psychology 10 4%
Other 45 20%
Unknown 60 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 October 2011.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#919
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,162
of 104,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#10
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 104,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.