Cited by 113Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMedical Practices and RehabilitationSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology

Functional Restoration for Chronic Low Back Pain: Two-Year Follow-Up of Two Randomized Clinical Trials

Bendix, Ane F., Bendix, Tom, Labriola, Merete, Bœkgaard, Pernille·1998·Spine

Abstract

Study design Two randomized, prospective clinical trials involving 238 chronic low back disability patients were carried out. Results at 2-year follow-up are presented. Objectives To compare the clinical outcomes of a multidisciplinary functional restoration program with a nontreated control group (Project A) and with two less intensive but different training programs (Project B). Summary of background data The effectiveness of functional restoration programs has not been firmly established. Results from trials carried out in the United States differ from those in trials conducted in other countries. Only a few of these studies have been carried out as prospective and randomized clinical studies. Methods Two hundred thirty-eight patients with chronic low back disability of at least 6 months' duration were included. There were 106 patients in project A and 132 patients in project B. Two years after completion of treatment patients were mailed a questionnaire that included questions regarding their work status, pain and disability levels, number of sick leave days, number of medical care contacts, medication use, physical activity levels, and subjective overall assessment of their "back life situation." Results Patients in both studies were comparable at inclusion, except that patients in Project A were recruited from all of Denmark, whereas those in Project B were from the greater Copenhagen area. Thirteen patients did not report for treatment after randomization. Of the remai…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00007632-199803150-00013

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bendix, A. F., Bendix, T., Labriola, M., & Bœkgaard, P.
Affiliations
Copenhagen University Hospital (DK)
Venue
Spine
Published
1998-03
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
717-725
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996000196
Cited by
113
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Spine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Keywords
chronic low back pain, functional restoration, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, sick leave, health care utilization, disability, leg pain, medication use, physical activity, treatment intensity
MeSH terms
Adult, Chronic Disease, Combined Modality Therapy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Persons with Disabilities, Disabled Persons, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Physical Education and Training, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Random Allocation, Treatment Outcome, Low Back Pain, Statistics, Nonparametric

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