Cited by 113Health Policy Implementation ScienceClinical practice guidelines implementationMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Implementation of the Dutch Low Back Pain Guideline for General Practitioners: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Engers, Arno J., Wensing, Michel, van Tulder, Mauritis W., Timmermans, Arno, Oostendorp, Rob A. B., Koes, Bart W., Grol, Richard·2005·Spine

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial for a multifaceted implementation strategy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of tailored interventions (multifaceted implementation strategy) to implement the Dutch low back pain guideline for general practitioners with regard to adherence to guideline recommendations. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Guidelines for the management of low back pain in primary care have been developed in various countries, but little is known about the optimal implementation strategy. A multifaceted implementation strategy was developed to overcome identified barriers to the implementation of the Dutch low back pain guideline for general practitioners. METHODS: General practitioners were randomized to an intervention or a control group. The general practitioners in the intervention group (n = 21) received tailored interventions consisting of the Dutch low back pain guideline for general practitioners, a 2-hour educational and clinical practice workshop; two scientific articles on low back pain management; the guideline for occupational physicians; a tool for patient education; and a tool for reaching agreement on low back care with physical, exercise, and manual therapists. The control group (n = 20) received no intervention. The participating general practitioners were asked to recruit consecutive patients with a new episode of low back pain as the main reason for consultation. General practitioners completed registration forms of each individual consultation with regard to the main outcome measures: advice and information, referral to other health-care providers, and prescription of medication. RESULTS: Forty-one of the 67 randomized general practitioners reported on a total of 616 consultations for 531 patients with nonspecific low back pain. The advice and explanation provided by the general practitioners, the prescription of paracetamol or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and prescription of pain medication on atime contingent or a pain contingent basis showed no statistically significant differences between the intervention and control groups. There were also no differences in overall referral rate. However, in follow-up consultations fewer patients were referred to a physical or exercise therapist by the general practitioners in the intervention group than in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: The multifaceted intervention strategy modestly improved implementation (for parts of the recommendations in) the Dutch low back pain guideline by general practitioners and produced small concomitant changes in patient management. The implementation strategy produced fewer referrals to therapists during follow-up consultations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.brs.0000155406.79479.3a

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Engers, A. J., Wensing, M., van Tulder, M. W., Timmermans, A., Oostendorp, R. A. B., Koes, B. W., & Grol, R.
Affiliations
  • Dutch College of General Practitioners (NL)
  • Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
  • Engers, Arno J.
  • Wensing, Michel
  • Oostendorp, Rob A. B.
  • Grol, Richard
Venue
Spine
Published
2005-03
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
559-600
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2080035844
Cited by
113
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
FWCI
20.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Spine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
low back pain, guideline implementation, general practitioners, primary care, non-specific low back pain, drug prescribing, patient education, implementation barriers
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Health Plan Implementation, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Pain Measurement, Physicians, Family, Low Back Pain, Guidelines as Topic, Guideline Adherence

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