Abstract
BackgroundRecent clinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of specific, multidisciplinary, bio-psychosocial, rehabilitation programmes for chronic neck pain. However, prognostic factors for the improvement of pain and disability are mostly unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore prognostic factors associated with improvements in chronic neck pain following participation in a three-week, multidisciplinary, bio-psychosocial, rehabilitation programme.MethodsIn this observational, prospective cohort study, a total of 112 patients were assessed at the beginning, end, and 6 months following the completion of a multidisciplinary, bio-psychosocial, rehabilitation programme. Inclusion for participation in the rehabilitation programme depended upon an interdisciplinary pain assessment. The primary outcome was neck pain and disability, which was measured using the Northern American Spine Society questionnaire for pain+disability and was quantified with effect sizes (ES). Multivariable linear regression analyses were used to explore potential prognostic factors associated with improvements in pain and disability scores at discharge and at the 6-month follow-up period.ResultsThe mean age of the patients was 59.7 years (standard deviation = 10.8), and 70.5% were female. Patients showed improvement in pain+disability at discharge (ES = 0.56; p < 0.001), which was sustained at the 6-month follow-up (ES = 0.56; p < 0.001). Prognostic factors associated with improvement in pain+disability scores at discharge included poor pain+disability baseline scores (partial, adjusted correlation r = 0.414, p < 0.001), older age (r = 0.223, p = 0.024), a good baseline cervical active range-of-motion (ROM) (r = 0.210, p < 0.033), and improvements in the Short-form 36 mental health scale (r = 0.197; p = 0.047) and cervical ROMs (r = 0.195, p = 0.048) from baseline values. Prognostic factors associated with improvements in pain+disability at the 6-month follow-up were similar and included poor pain+disability baseline scores (partial, adjusted correlation r = 0.364, p < 0.001), improvements in the Short-form 36 mental health scale (r = 0.232; p = 0.002), cervical ROMs (r = 0.247, p = 0.011), and better cervical ROM baseline scores. However, older age was not a factor (r = 0.134, p = 0.172).ConclusionsFuture prognostic models for treatment outcomes in chronic neck pain patients should consider cervical ROM and mental health status. Knowledge of prognostic factors may help in the adoption of individualized treatment for patients who are less likely to respond to multidisciplinary rehabilitation.
Highlights
Recent clinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of specific, multidisciplinary, biopsychosocial, rehabilitation programmes for chronic neck pain
Knowledge of prognostic factors may help in the adoption of individualized treatment for patients who are less likely to respond to multidisciplinary rehabilitation
In a recent randomised control trial (RCT), as well as a clinical study that included the intra-individual control of effects, CNPspecific, multidisciplinary, bio-psychosocial rehabilitation (MBR) programmes were shown to improve pain and physical functioning for at least one year in patients who failed to respond to less complex interventions [10, 11]
Summary
Recent clinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of specific, multidisciplinary, biopsychosocial, rehabilitation programmes for chronic neck pain. Prognostic factors for the improvement of pain and disability are mostly unknown. The aim of this study was to explore prognostic factors associated with improvements in chronic neck pain following participation in a three-week, multidisciplinary, biopsychosocial, rehabilitation programme. In a recent randomised control trial (RCT), as well as a clinical study that included the intra-individual control of effects, CNPspecific, multidisciplinary, bio-psychosocial rehabilitation (MBR) programmes were shown to improve pain and physical functioning for at least one year in patients who failed to respond to less complex interventions [10, 11]. Our clinical experience suggests that individual responses to MBR vary considerably and may be dependent on specific prognostic factors
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
