1. ZHAW digitalcollection
  2. Gesundheit
  3. Publikationen
  4. Publikationen Gesundheit
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-4990
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSalathé, Cornelia Rolli-
dc.contributor.authorMelloh, Markus-
dc.contributor.authorCrawford, Rebecca-
dc.contributor.authorScherrer, Stephanie-
dc.contributor.authorBoos, Norbert-
dc.contributor.authorElfering, Achim-
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-23T15:39:11Z-
dc.date.available2019-01-23T15:39:11Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.issn2192-5682de_CH
dc.identifier.issn2192-5690de_CH
dc.identifier.urihttps://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/handle/11475/14578-
dc.description.abstractStudy Design: Systematic review Objectives: To review the current literature on the treatment efficacy, clinical utility, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation (MBR) for patients suffering from persistent (nonspecific) lower back pain (LBP) in relation to pain intensity, disability, health-related quality of life, and work ability/sick leave. Methods: We carried out a systematic search of Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central, EMBASE, and PsycINFO for English- and German-language literature published between January 2010 and July 2017. Study selection consisted of exclusion and inclusion phases. After screening for duplication, studies were excluded on the basis of criteria covering study design, number of participants, language of publication, and provision of information about the intervention. All the remaining articles dealing with the efficacy, utility, or cost-effectiveness of intensive (more than 25 hours per week) MBR encompassing at least 3 health domains and cognitive behavioral therapy–based psychological education were included. Results: The search retrieved 1199 publications of which 1116 were duplicates or met the exclusion criteria. Seventy of the remaining 83 articles did not meet the inclusion criteria; thus 13 studies were reviewed. All studies reporting changes in pain intensity or disability over 12 months after MBR reported moderate effect sizes and/or p-values for both outcomes. The effects on health-related quality of life were mixed, but MBR substantially reduced costs. Overall MBR produced an enduring improvement in work ability despite controversy and variable results. Conclusions: MBR is an effective treatment for nonspecific LBP, but there is room for improvement in cost-effectiveness and impact on sick leave, where the evidence was less compelling.de_CH
dc.language.isoende_CH
dc.publisherAOSpinede_CH
dc.relation.ispartofGlobal Spine Journalde_CH
dc.rightshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/de_CH
dc.subjectPersistent low back painde_CH
dc.subjectSystematic reviewde_CH
dc.subjectCost-effectivenessde_CH
dc.subjectTreatment utilityde_CH
dc.subjectEfficacyde_CH
dc.subjectCognitive behavioral therapyde_CH
dc.subjectMultidisciplinary rehabilitationde_CH
dc.subject.ddc617.5: Orthopädische Chirurgiede_CH
dc.titleTreatment efficacy, clinical utility, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation treatments for persistent low back pain : a systematic reviewde_CH
dc.typeBeitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriftde_CH
dcterms.typeTextde_CH
zhaw.departementGesundheitde_CH
zhaw.organisationalunitInstitut für Public Health (IPH)de_CH
dc.identifier.doi10.21256/zhaw-4990-
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/2192568218765483de_CH
zhaw.funding.euNode_CH
zhaw.issue8de_CH
zhaw.originated.zhawYesde_CH
zhaw.pages.end886de_CH
zhaw.pages.start872de_CH
zhaw.publication.statuspublishedVersionde_CH
zhaw.volume8de_CH
zhaw.publication.reviewPeer review (Publikation)de_CH
Appears in collections:Publikationen Gesundheit

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
2018_Salathe_Treatment_efficacy_clinical_utility_and_cost_effectiveness_of_multidisciplinary.pdf321.41 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show simple item record
Salathé, C. R., Melloh, M., Crawford, R., Scherrer, S., Boos, N., & Elfering, A. (2018). Treatment efficacy, clinical utility, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation treatments for persistent low back pain : a systematic review. Global Spine Journal, 8(8), 872–886. https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-4990
Salathé, C.R. et al. (2018) ‘Treatment efficacy, clinical utility, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation treatments for persistent low back pain : a systematic review’, Global Spine Journal, 8(8), pp. 872–886. Available at: https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-4990.
C. R. Salathé, M. Melloh, R. Crawford, S. Scherrer, N. Boos, and A. Elfering, “Treatment efficacy, clinical utility, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation treatments for persistent low back pain : a systematic review,” Global Spine Journal, vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 872–886, 2018, doi: 10.21256/zhaw-4990.
SALATHÉ, Cornelia Rolli, Markus MELLOH, Rebecca CRAWFORD, Stephanie SCHERRER, Norbert BOOS und Achim ELFERING, 2018. Treatment efficacy, clinical utility, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation treatments for persistent low back pain : a systematic review. Global Spine Journal. 2018. Bd. 8, Nr. 8, S. 872–886. DOI 10.21256/zhaw-4990
Salathé, Cornelia Rolli, Markus Melloh, Rebecca Crawford, Stephanie Scherrer, Norbert Boos, and Achim Elfering. 2018. “Treatment Efficacy, Clinical Utility, and Cost-Effectiveness of Multidisciplinary Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation Treatments for Persistent Low Back Pain : A Systematic Review.” Global Spine Journal 8 (8): 872–86. https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-4990.
Salathé, Cornelia Rolli, et al. “Treatment Efficacy, Clinical Utility, and Cost-Effectiveness of Multidisciplinary Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation Treatments for Persistent Low Back Pain : A Systematic Review.” Global Spine Journal, vol. 8, no. 8, 2018, pp. 872–86, https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-4990.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.