↓ Skip to main content

Return-to-Work Interventions for Low Back Pain

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
5 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Return-to-Work Interventions for Low Back Pain
Published in
Sports Medicine, October 2012
DOI 10.2165/00007256-200232040-00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Bart Staal, Hynek Hlobil, Maurits W. van Tulder, Albère J. A. Köke, Tjabe Smid, Willem van Mechelen

Abstract

Low back pain is a major medical and social problem associated with disability, work absenteeism and high costs. Given the impact of the problem, there is a need for effective treatment interventions in occupational healthcare that aim at the prevention of chronic disability and the realisation of return to work. These so-called return-to-work (RTW) interventions are becoming increasingly popular. As well as questions concerning the effectiveness of RTW interventions, there are also important questions on the actual content and underlying concepts of these multifactorial intervention strategies. The purpose of this review is to examine the literature on the content and underlying concepts of RTW interventions for low back pain. A systematic literature search identified 14 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of 19 RTW interventions. The content and concepts of these RTW interventions are described, compared and discussed in this review. Further, the contents of the RTW interventions are classified by the use of predefined components (physical exercises, education, behavioural treatments and ergonomic measures). The identified RTW interventions varied with respect to the disciplines involved, the target population and the number and duration of sessions. The classification showed that physical exercises were a component of most of the selected interventions, followed by education, behavioural treatments and ergonomic measures. The most prevalent combination of components was the combination of physical exercises, behavioural treatment and education. However, the types of physical exercises, behavioural treatment and education varied widely among the RTW interventions. The described concepts for the physical exercises were an increase of muscle strength, coordination, range of motion of the spine and cardiovascular fitness, and a decrease of muscle tension. Education as a part of RTW interventions is believed to increase the understanding of patients regarding their disorder and treatment. Behavioural treatments were mainly based on the gate control theory of pain (psychophysiological processes are involved in pain perception) and/or the operant conditioning hypothesis (pain behaviour is determined by its consequences). No concepts were described for ergonomic measures. Finally, the plausibility of the described concepts is discussed. Future RCTs on this topic should evaluate the underlying concepts of the RTW intervention in addition to its effectiveness.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 121 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Researcher 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 30 24%
Unknown 26 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 11%
Sports and Recreations 11 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Psychology 6 5%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 30 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 02 September 2016.
All research outputs
#1,712,129
of 25,413,176 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,276
of 2,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,155
of 191,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#186
of 832 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,413,176 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,879 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
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 191,632 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 832 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.