Cited by 104Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMedical Practices and RehabilitationSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology

The Long-term Effect of Multidisciplinary Back Training: A Systematic Review

van Geen, Jan-Willem, Edelaar, Michel J. A., Janssen, Miriam, van Eijk, Jacques Th. M.·2007·Spine

Abstract

In Brief Study Design. Systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Objectives. To determine the long-term effect of multidisciplinary back training on the work participation of patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. Summary of Background Data. Chronic low back pain is influenced by multiple factors. Multidisciplinary back training represents one of the options to take this multiplicity into account. So far, only evidence of the short-term effectiveness of this approach in terms of work participation is available. Methods. Electronic databases were searched and the references of various articles were screened for relevant publications. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. All included studies were evaluated for their methodologic quality. Results. Five of the studies had a low methodologic quality. All high-quality studies found a positive effect on at least one of the 4 outcome measures used. Based on our criteria, effectiveness was found for the outcome measures of work participation and quality of life. No effectiveness was found for experienced pain and functional status. The intensity of the intervention seems to have no substantial influence on the effectiveness of the intervention. Conclusion. In the long-term, multidisciplinary back training has a positive effect on work participation in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. In this survey, the long-term effectiveness of multidisciplinary back training in terms of work participation by chronic patients with low back pain was evaluated. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was performed. A positive effect of multidisciplinary back training on work participation was found.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.brs.0000251745.00674.08

Cites

30 of 30 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
van Geen, J.-W., Edelaar, M. J. A., Janssen, M., & van Eijk, J. T. M.
Affiliations
Heliomare (NL)
Venue
Spine
Published
2007-01
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
249-255
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1987182668
Cited by
104
References
28
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 10
FWCI
0.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Spine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
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 non-specific low back pain, work participation, long-term effectiveness, quality of life, pain intensity, functional status, methodological quality of trials
MeSH terms
Chronic Disease, Humans, Patient Care Team, Quality of Life, Rehabilitation, Vocational, Time Factors, Work, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Low Back Pain, Physical Therapy Modalities

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