Cited by 495Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationWorkplace Health and Well-beingMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Prognostic factors for duration of sick leave in patients sick listed with acute low back pain: a systematic review of the literature

Open access
Steenstra, I A, Verbeek, J H, Heymans, M W, Bongers, P M·2005·Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Abstract

Background:The percentages of patients with acute low back pain (LBP) that go on to a chronic state varies between studies from 2% to 34%. In some of these cases low back pain leads to great costs. Aims:To evaluate the evidence for prognostic factors for return to work among workers sick listed with acute LBP. Methods:Systematic literature search with a quality assessment of studies, assessment of levels of evidence for all factors, and pooling of effect sizes. Results:Inclusion of studies in the review was restricted to inception cohort studies of workers with LBP on sick leave for less than six weeks, with the outcome measured in absolute terms, relative terms, survival curve, or duration of sick leave. Of the studies, 18 publications (14 cohorts) fulfilled all inclusion criteria. One low quality study, four moderate quality studies, and nine high quality studies were identified; 79 prognostic factors were studied and grouped in eight categories for which the evidence was assessed. Conclusions:Specific LBP, higher disability levels, older age, female gender, more social dysfunction and more social isolation, heavier work, and receiving higher compensation were identified as predictors for a longer duration of sick leave. A history of LBP, job satisfaction, educational level, marital status, number of dependants, smoking, working more than 8 hour shifts, occupation, and size of industry or company do not influence duration of sick leave due to LBP. Many different constructs were measured to identify psychosocial predictors of long term sick leave, which made it impossible to determine the role of these factors.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/oem.2004.015842

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Frymoyer J. An international challenge to the diagnosis and treatment of disorders of the lumbar spine. Spine 1993;18:2147-52.
  2. The Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook (updated September 1997). Oxford: Cochrane Library [database on disk and CD- ROM]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 1997.
  3. Oleinick A, Gluck JV, Guire K. Factors affecting first return to work following a compensable occupational back injury. Am J Ind Med 1996;30:540-55.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Steenstra, I. A., Verbeek, J. H., Heymans, M. W., & Bongers, P. M.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
  • Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (FI)
  • Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (NL)
Corresponding author
Steenstra, I A
Venue
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2005-11-18
Volume
62
Issue
12
Pages
851-860
ISSN
  • 0007-1072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1351-0711
  • 1470-7926
OpenAlex
W2123717004
Cited by
495
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 45
FWCI
1.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Occupational and Environmental Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • TNO Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repository hosted by TU Delft Library (TU Delft) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Funders
  • ZonMw
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
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
acute low back pain, sick leave duration, return to work, prognostic factors, psychosocial risk factors, social isolation, social dysfunction, disability, compensation, work-related musculoskeletal disorders, workers
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Age Factors, Disability Evaluation, Humans, Prognosis, Sex Factors, Social Isolation, Work Schedule Tolerance, Cohort Studies, Low Back Pain, Disease Progression, 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