Effectiveness of a multimodal treatment program for chronic low-back pain

Abstract

In recent years, multidisciplinary pain programs were seen to successfully treat patients by basing treatment on a combination of physical exercise and psychological interventions. However, in spite of their effectiveness, it still remains to be clarified exactly which features of these programs were responsible for patient improvement. Cognitive-behavioral models posit that improvement is due, in part, to changes in patient coping strategies. Nonetheless, as reflected by the conflicting opinions present in the literature, it is questionable whether a so-called `cognitive shift' is an accurate indicator for return to work of disabled patients. Ninety patients with chronic low back pain took part in a multidisciplinary treatment program. Therapeutic environment reinforces wellness behavior and enhances the patients' sense of control over their pain and resulting disability. The main therapeutic target point was to facilitate return to work. Ways of coping were measured by a well studied coping inventory in the German language (FEKB). Factor analysis revealed three factors: `catastrophizing', `search for information' and `cognitive control'. In addition, assessment included measurements of pain intensity, depression, disability, flexibility of the lumbar spine, and different performance parameters. All of them were measured prior to and at the end of treatment, and following intervals of 6 and 12 months after discharge from program. Measurements showed significant changes over time, but more importantly, nearly all results were seen to stabilize at the 6- and 12-month evaluation following treatment. The coping strategies demonstrated little or poor change. In addition, coping measures and change in coping behavior showed poor prognostic relevance. But other psycho-social parameters like self-evaluation of potential return-to-work, application for pension, the length of pre-absence from work, and a decrease in subjective disability following treatment were effective indicators for `back-to-work'. Other objective parameters, such as medical history, physical impairment and general physical variables were seen to have little predictive value in determining a return to work. The results suggest that the primary target point for further investigation is the analysis of the patients' beliefs about their pain. Our results indicate that future research must be attentive to the complex interactions between environmental factors and the coping demands posed by the specific nature of pain problems.