Abstract

BackgroundEvidence shows that low back specific patient information is effective in sub-acute low back pain (LBP), but effectiveness and cost-effectiveness (CE) of information in early phase symptoms is not clear. We assessed effectiveness and CE of patient information in mild LBP in the occupational health (OH) setting in a quasi-experimental study.MethodsA cohort of employees (N = 312, aged <57) with non-specific, mild LBP (Visual Analogue Scale between 10–34 mm) was selected from the respondents of an employee survey (N = 2480; response rate 71 %). A random sample, representing the natural course of LBP (NC, N = 83; no intervention), was extracted as a control group. Remaining employees were invited (181 included, 47 declined, one excluded) into a randomised controlled study with two 1:1 allocated parallel intervention arms (“Booklet”, N = 92; “Combined”, N = 89). All participants received the “Back Book” patient information booklet and the Combined also an individual verbal review of the booklet. Physical impairment (PHI), LBP, health care (HC) utilisation, and all-cause sickness absence (SA) were assessed at two years. CE of the interventions on SA days was analysed by using direct HC costs in one year, two years from baseline. Multiple imputation was used for missing values.ResultsCompared to NC, the Booklet reduced HC costs by 196€ and SA by 3.5 days per year. In 81 % of the bootstrapped cases the Booklet was both cost saving and effective on SA. Compared to NC, in the Combined arm, the figures were 107€, 0.4 days, and 54 %, respectively. PHI decreased in both interventions.ConclusionsBooklet information alone was cost-effective in comparison to natural course of mild LBP. Combined information reduced HC costs. Both interventions reduced physical impairment. Mere booklet information is beneficial for employees who report mild LBP in the OH setting, and is also cost saving for the health care system.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00908102Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-2974-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • Evidence shows that low back specific patient information is effective in sub-acute low back pain (LBP), but effectiveness and cost-effectiveness (CE) of information in early phase symptoms is not clear

  • Use of health care (HC) resources According to the reported HC usage, the direct HC cost per person in the Combined (n = 67), booklet alone patient information arm (Booklet) (n = 67) and natural course (NC) (n = 51) groups was 188€, 73€ and 370€, respectively

  • The Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in Booklet vs. NC was 54€ and in Combined vs. NC 315€ meaning the amount of money required for each avoided sickness absence (SA) day

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Evidence shows that low back specific patient information is effective in sub-acute low back pain (LBP), but effectiveness and cost-effectiveness (CE) of information in early phase symptoms is not clear. The optimal patient group and the type of information (personal or group, oral or written etc.) should be determined. It should be decided who is the main responsible person for the delivery of the information [14]. The Back Book is probably the most widely used guideline-based patient information booklet for LBP [8, 13, 15,16,17,18]

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call