Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017 Mar;27(1):82-91.
doi: 10.1007/s10926-016-9634-5.

Return to Work in Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Multidisciplinary Intervention Versus Brief Intervention: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Return to Work in Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Multidisciplinary Intervention Versus Brief Intervention: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Randi Brendbekken et al. J Occup Rehabil. 2017 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: This randomized clinical trial was performed to compare the effect of a new multidisciplinary intervention (MI) programme to a brief intervention (BI) programme on return to work (RTW), fully and partly, at a 12-month and 24-month follow-up in patients on long-term sick leave due to musculoskeletal pain.

Methods: Patients (n = 284, mean age 41.3 years, 53.9 % women) who were sick-listed with musculoskeletal pain and referred to a specialist clinic in physical rehabilitation were randomized to MI (n = 141) or BI (n = 143). The MI included the use of a visual educational tool, which facilitated patient-therapist communication and self-management. The MI also applied one more profession, more therapist time and a comprehensive focus on the psychosocial factors, particularly the working conditions, compared to a BI. The main features of the latter are a thorough medical, educational examination, a brief cognitive assessment based on the non-injury model, and a recommendation to return to normal activity as soon as possible.

Results: The number of patients with full-time RTW developed similarly in the two groups. The patients receiving MI had a higher probability to partly RTW during the first 7 months of the follow-up compared to the BI-group.

Conclusions: There were no differences between the groups on full-time RTW during the 24 months. However, the results indicate that MI hastens the return to work process in long-term sick leave through the increased use of partial sick leave.

Trial registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov with the registration number NCT01346423.

Keywords: Chronic pain; Coping; Return to work; Sick leave; Work disability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart of participation in treatment sessions: MI multidisciplinary intervention, BI brief intervention, RTW return to work
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The ISIVET-figure “Working conditions”, assessed three times
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Descriptive statistics on work status in valid % of multidisciplinary intervention group (MI) and brief intervention group (BI): proportions fully returned to work (f-RTW), partly returned to work (p-RTW) for both groups at each month for 24 months follow-up

References

    1. Brooks PM. The burden of musculoskeletal disease—a global perspective. Clin Rheumatol. 2006;25(6):778–781. doi: 10.1007/s10067-006-0240-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bevan S, Quadrello T, McGee R, Mahdon M, Vavrovsky A, Barham L. Fit for work. Musculoskeletal disorders in the European workforce. London: The Work Foundation; 2009.
    1. Brage S, Ihlebæk C, Natvig B, Bruusgaard D. Muskel-og skjelettlidelser som årsak til sykefravær og uføreytelser [Musculoskeletal disorders as causes of sick leave and disability benefits]. Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening: tidsskrift for praktisk medicin, ny raekke. 2010;130(23):2369–70. - PubMed
    1. Schultz IZ, Gatchel RJ. Handbook of complex occupational disability claims: early risk identification, intervention, and prevention. Berlin: Springer; 2006.
    1. Waddell G, Burton AK. Is work good for your health and well-being? London: The Stationery Office; 2006.

Publication types

Associated data