Primary care patients with musculoskeletal pain
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate long-term sick leave among primary care patients with musculoskeletal disorders and the predictive value of health-status and sense-of-coherence measures. METHODS: Patients aged 17 to 64 years who, during seven weeks, attended one of six primary care centers because of non-traumatic musculoskeletal pain and who completed the SF-36 health questionnaire and the sense of coherence (SOC) scale at baseline and after one year. RESULTS: Of 189 patients, 36 (19%) were sicklisted for at least three months before and/or after their visit; the most common diagnoses were non-specific soft-tissue or multiple joint, low back, and shoulder pain. The long-term sicklisted patients had significantly worse baseline SF-36 and SOC scores than the non-sicklisted patients; moderate improvement in the SF-36 bodily pain but no improvement in the physical functioning scores occurred. The duration of sick leave at baseline and the SF-36 bodily pain score were significant predictors of continuos one-year work disability. CONCLUSION: Long-term sick leave was common among primary care patients with musculoskeletal pain. The physical functioning and return-to-work outcomes after one year were poor. The SF-36 bodily pain scale might be helpful in identifying at risk patients.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Impaired health status assessed by SF-36 has earlier been associated with work disability in rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus and musculoskeletal pain.
“Impaired health status assessed by SF-36 has earlier been associated with work disability in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) [35], systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) [40] and musculoskeletal pain [41].”
From Which aspects of health differ between working and nonworking women with fibromyalgia? A cross-sectional study of work status and health (2012) · cites this paper as [41]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 10 · Cited by 41
- Authors
- Atroshi, I., Andersson, I. H., Gummesson, C., Leden, I., Odenbring, S., & Ornstein, E.
- Affiliations
- Department of Orthopedics, HaEssleholm-Kristianstad Hospitals, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine and Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Kristianstad Hospital, Kristianstad, Sweden
- Venue
- Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 239-244
- ISSN
- 0300-9742 (ISSN-L)
- 1502-7732
- OpenAlex
- W1808770643
- Cited by
- 41
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 1.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- musculoskeletal pain, sick leave, work disability, sense of coherence, SF-36 bodily pain, physical function, return to work, low back pain, shoulder pain, soft tissue pain, primary care patients, risk prediction
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Disability Evaluation, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Musculoskeletal Diseases, Predictive Value of Tests, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Class, Sick Leave
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review