Dose or content? Effectiveness of pain rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic low back pain: A systematic review

The influence of dose on outcome of pain rehabilitation programs remains unclear. Dose has not been the primary aim and could not be isolated from content in studies. We sought to systematically analyze the influence of dose of pain rehabilitation programs (PRPs) for patients with chronic low back p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pain (Amsterdam) 2014-01, Vol.155 (1), p.179-189
Hauptverfasser: Waterschoot, Franka P.C., Dijkstra, Pieter U., Hollak, Niek, de Vries, Haitze J., Geertzen, Jan H.B., Reneman, Michiel F.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 189
container_issue 1
container_start_page 179
container_title Pain (Amsterdam)
container_volume 155
creator Waterschoot, Franka P.C.
Dijkstra, Pieter U.
Hollak, Niek
de Vries, Haitze J.
Geertzen, Jan H.B.
Reneman, Michiel F.
description The influence of dose on outcome of pain rehabilitation programs remains unclear. Dose has not been the primary aim and could not be isolated from content in studies. We sought to systematically analyze the influence of dose of pain rehabilitation programs (PRPs) for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) on disability, work participation, and quality of life (QoL). Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, and Embase up to October 2012, using MeSH terms, other relevant terms and free-text words. Randomized controlled trials in English, Dutch, and German, analyzing the effect of PRPs, were included. One of the analyzed interventions had to be a PRP. Outcomes should be reported regarding disability, work participation, or QoL. To analyze dose, the number of contact hours should be reported. Two reviewers independently selected titles, abstracts, and full-text articles on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated for each intervention, and influence of dose variables was analyzed by a mixed model analysis. Eighteen studies were identified, reporting a wide variety of dose variables and contents of PRPs. Analyses showed that evaluation moment, number of disciplines, type of intervention, duration of intervention in weeks, percentage of women, and age influenced the outcomes of PRPs. The independent effect of dose variables could not be distinguished from content because these variables were strongly associated. Because dose variables were never studied separately or reported independently, we were not able to disentangle the relationship between dose, content, and effects of PRPs on disability, work participation, and QoL.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.pain.2013.10.006
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1490706722</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0304395913005459</els_id><sourcerecordid>1490706722</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4314-bd03e37beda7d65150daebf4016a6e783e7ddc33e96fc2f5c9f188727eb299093</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhi0EotvCH-CAfEHikq0_8rFGSKhqy4dUiQucLccZE2-TeLG9jar--U66C9w4WR6977wzzxDyhrM1Z7w-3653xk9rwbjEwpqx-hlZ8U0jiroW8jlZMcnKQqpKnZDTlLaMMSGEeklORMllVcpqRR6uQgIaIrVhyjDlT_TaObDZ38EEKdHg6BJCI_Sm9YPPJvsw0V0Mv6IZE3Vo3WENrYnOPvfU9jFM3tIhzLQ19vbJ_4Fe0HSfMoyotdjtzsP8irxwZkjw-viekZ-fr39cfi1uvn_5dnlxU9hS8rJoOyZBNi10punqilesM9C6EhGYGpqNhKbrrJSgameFq6xyfIMUGmiFUkzJM_L-0Ben_r2HlPXok4VhMBOEfdK8VKxhdSMESsVBamNIKYLTu-hHE-81Z3qBrrd62Ucv0JcaQkfT22P_fTtC99fyhzIK3h0FJlkzuGgm69M_3QaH5E2JuvKgm8OQIabbYT9D1D2YIfcYtYSpusBsXB5_xXLRxfbxYAOEiGCjThYPYqHzEU-pu-D_N_4jte2xSQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1490706722</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dose or content? Effectiveness of pain rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic low back pain: A systematic review</title><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Waterschoot, Franka P.C. ; Dijkstra, Pieter U. ; Hollak, Niek ; de Vries, Haitze J. ; Geertzen, Jan H.B. ; Reneman, Michiel F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Waterschoot, Franka P.C. ; Dijkstra, Pieter U. ; Hollak, Niek ; de Vries, Haitze J. ; Geertzen, Jan H.B. ; Reneman, Michiel F.</creatorcontrib><description>The influence of dose on outcome of pain rehabilitation programs remains unclear. Dose has not been the primary aim and could not be isolated from content in studies. We sought to systematically analyze the influence of dose of pain rehabilitation programs (PRPs) for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) on disability, work participation, and quality of life (QoL). Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, and Embase up to October 2012, using MeSH terms, other relevant terms and free-text words. Randomized controlled trials in English, Dutch, and German, analyzing the effect of PRPs, were included. One of the analyzed interventions had to be a PRP. Outcomes should be reported regarding disability, work participation, or QoL. To analyze dose, the number of contact hours should be reported. Two reviewers independently selected titles, abstracts, and full-text articles on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated for each intervention, and influence of dose variables was analyzed by a mixed model analysis. Eighteen studies were identified, reporting a wide variety of dose variables and contents of PRPs. Analyses showed that evaluation moment, number of disciplines, type of intervention, duration of intervention in weeks, percentage of women, and age influenced the outcomes of PRPs. The independent effect of dose variables could not be distinguished from content because these variables were strongly associated. Because dose variables were never studied separately or reported independently, we were not able to disentangle the relationship between dose, content, and effects of PRPs on disability, work participation, and QoL.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0304-3959</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-6623</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.10.006</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24135435</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PAINDB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Chronic low back pain ; Databases, Bibliographic - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Dose ; Effectiveness ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Humans ; Low Back Pain - psychology ; Low Back Pain - rehabilitation ; Pain Management ; Pain rehabilitation programs ; Quality of Life ; Somesthesis and somesthetic pathways (proprioception, exteroception, nociception); interoception; electrolocation. Sensory receptors ; Treatment Outcome ; Vertebrates: nervous system and sense organs</subject><ispartof>Pain (Amsterdam), 2014-01, Vol.155 (1), p.179-189</ispartof><rights>2013 International Association for the Study of Pain</rights><rights>International Association for the Study of Pain</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4314-bd03e37beda7d65150daebf4016a6e783e7ddc33e96fc2f5c9f188727eb299093</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4314-bd03e37beda7d65150daebf4016a6e783e7ddc33e96fc2f5c9f188727eb299093</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,4010,27900,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=28093174$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24135435$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Waterschoot, Franka P.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dijkstra, Pieter U.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollak, Niek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Haitze J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geertzen, Jan H.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reneman, Michiel F.</creatorcontrib><title>Dose or content? Effectiveness of pain rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic low back pain: A systematic review</title><title>Pain (Amsterdam)</title><addtitle>Pain</addtitle><description>The influence of dose on outcome of pain rehabilitation programs remains unclear. Dose has not been the primary aim and could not be isolated from content in studies. We sought to systematically analyze the influence of dose of pain rehabilitation programs (PRPs) for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) on disability, work participation, and quality of life (QoL). Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, and Embase up to October 2012, using MeSH terms, other relevant terms and free-text words. Randomized controlled trials in English, Dutch, and German, analyzing the effect of PRPs, were included. One of the analyzed interventions had to be a PRP. Outcomes should be reported regarding disability, work participation, or QoL. To analyze dose, the number of contact hours should be reported. Two reviewers independently selected titles, abstracts, and full-text articles on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated for each intervention, and influence of dose variables was analyzed by a mixed model analysis. Eighteen studies were identified, reporting a wide variety of dose variables and contents of PRPs. Analyses showed that evaluation moment, number of disciplines, type of intervention, duration of intervention in weeks, percentage of women, and age influenced the outcomes of PRPs. The independent effect of dose variables could not be distinguished from content because these variables were strongly associated. Because dose variables were never studied separately or reported independently, we were not able to disentangle the relationship between dose, content, and effects of PRPs on disability, work participation, and QoL.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Chronic low back pain</subject><subject>Databases, Bibliographic - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Dose</subject><subject>Effectiveness</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - psychology</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - rehabilitation</subject><subject>Pain Management</subject><subject>Pain rehabilitation programs</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Somesthesis and somesthetic pathways (proprioception, exteroception, nociception); interoception; electrolocation. Sensory receptors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Vertebrates: nervous system and sense organs</subject><issn>0304-3959</issn><issn>1872-6623</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhi0EotvCH-CAfEHikq0_8rFGSKhqy4dUiQucLccZE2-TeLG9jar--U66C9w4WR6977wzzxDyhrM1Z7w-3653xk9rwbjEwpqx-hlZ8U0jiroW8jlZMcnKQqpKnZDTlLaMMSGEeklORMllVcpqRR6uQgIaIrVhyjDlT_TaObDZ38EEKdHg6BJCI_Sm9YPPJvsw0V0Mv6IZE3Vo3WENrYnOPvfU9jFM3tIhzLQ19vbJ_4Fe0HSfMoyotdjtzsP8irxwZkjw-viekZ-fr39cfi1uvn_5dnlxU9hS8rJoOyZBNi10punqilesM9C6EhGYGpqNhKbrrJSgameFq6xyfIMUGmiFUkzJM_L-0Ben_r2HlPXok4VhMBOEfdK8VKxhdSMESsVBamNIKYLTu-hHE-81Z3qBrrd62Ucv0JcaQkfT22P_fTtC99fyhzIK3h0FJlkzuGgm69M_3QaH5E2JuvKgm8OQIabbYT9D1D2YIfcYtYSpusBsXB5_xXLRxfbxYAOEiGCjThYPYqHzEU-pu-D_N_4jte2xSQ</recordid><startdate>201401</startdate><enddate>201401</enddate><creator>Waterschoot, Franka P.C.</creator><creator>Dijkstra, Pieter U.</creator><creator>Hollak, Niek</creator><creator>de Vries, Haitze J.</creator><creator>Geertzen, Jan H.B.</creator><creator>Reneman, Michiel F.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>International Association for the Study of Pain</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201401</creationdate><title>Dose or content? Effectiveness of pain rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic low back pain: A systematic review</title><author>Waterschoot, Franka P.C. ; Dijkstra, Pieter U. ; Hollak, Niek ; de Vries, Haitze J. ; Geertzen, Jan H.B. ; Reneman, Michiel F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4314-bd03e37beda7d65150daebf4016a6e783e7ddc33e96fc2f5c9f188727eb299093</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Chronic low back pain</topic><topic>Databases, Bibliographic - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Dose</topic><topic>Effectiveness</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - psychology</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - rehabilitation</topic><topic>Pain Management</topic><topic>Pain rehabilitation programs</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Somesthesis and somesthetic pathways (proprioception, exteroception, nociception); interoception; electrolocation. Sensory receptors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Vertebrates: nervous system and sense organs</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Waterschoot, Franka P.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dijkstra, Pieter U.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollak, Niek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Haitze J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geertzen, Jan H.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reneman, Michiel F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Pain (Amsterdam)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Waterschoot, Franka P.C.</au><au>Dijkstra, Pieter U.</au><au>Hollak, Niek</au><au>de Vries, Haitze J.</au><au>Geertzen, Jan H.B.</au><au>Reneman, Michiel F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dose or content? Effectiveness of pain rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic low back pain: A systematic review</atitle><jtitle>Pain (Amsterdam)</jtitle><addtitle>Pain</addtitle><date>2014-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>155</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>179</spage><epage>189</epage><pages>179-189</pages><issn>0304-3959</issn><eissn>1872-6623</eissn><coden>PAINDB</coden><abstract>The influence of dose on outcome of pain rehabilitation programs remains unclear. Dose has not been the primary aim and could not be isolated from content in studies. We sought to systematically analyze the influence of dose of pain rehabilitation programs (PRPs) for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) on disability, work participation, and quality of life (QoL). Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, and Embase up to October 2012, using MeSH terms, other relevant terms and free-text words. Randomized controlled trials in English, Dutch, and German, analyzing the effect of PRPs, were included. One of the analyzed interventions had to be a PRP. Outcomes should be reported regarding disability, work participation, or QoL. To analyze dose, the number of contact hours should be reported. Two reviewers independently selected titles, abstracts, and full-text articles on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated for each intervention, and influence of dose variables was analyzed by a mixed model analysis. Eighteen studies were identified, reporting a wide variety of dose variables and contents of PRPs. Analyses showed that evaluation moment, number of disciplines, type of intervention, duration of intervention in weeks, percentage of women, and age influenced the outcomes of PRPs. The independent effect of dose variables could not be distinguished from content because these variables were strongly associated. Because dose variables were never studied separately or reported independently, we were not able to disentangle the relationship between dose, content, and effects of PRPs on disability, work participation, and QoL.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia, PA</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>24135435</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.pain.2013.10.006</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0304-3959
ispartof Pain (Amsterdam), 2014-01, Vol.155 (1), p.179-189
issn 0304-3959
1872-6623
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1490706722
source Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload; MEDLINE
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Chronic low back pain
Databases, Bibliographic - statistics & numerical data
Dose
Effectiveness
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Humans
Low Back Pain - psychology
Low Back Pain - rehabilitation
Pain Management
Pain rehabilitation programs
Quality of Life
Somesthesis and somesthetic pathways (proprioception, exteroception, nociception)
interoception
electrolocation. Sensory receptors
Treatment Outcome
Vertebrates: nervous system and sense organs
title Dose or content? Effectiveness of pain rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic low back pain: A systematic review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T03%3A30%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dose%20or%20content?%20Effectiveness%20of%20pain%20rehabilitation%20programs%20for%20patients%20with%20chronic%20low%20back%20pain:%20A%20systematic%20review&rft.jtitle=Pain%20(Amsterdam)&rft.au=Waterschoot,%20Franka%20P.C.&rft.date=2014-01&rft.volume=155&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=179&rft.epage=189&rft.pages=179-189&rft.issn=0304-3959&rft.eissn=1872-6623&rft.coden=PAINDB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.pain.2013.10.006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1490706722%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1490706722&rft_id=info:pmid/24135435&rft_els_id=S0304395913005459&rfr_iscdi=true