Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Substantial sick-leave costs savings due to a graded activity intervention for workers with non-specific sub-acute low back pain

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study is to compare the costs and benefits of a graded activity (GA) intervention to usual care (UC) for sick-listed workers with non-specific low back pain (LBP). The study is a single-blind, randomized controlled trial with 3-year follow-up. A total of 134 (126 men and 8 women) predominantly blue-collar workers, sick-listed due to LBP were recruited and randomly assigned to either GA (N = 67; mean age 39 ± 9 years) or to UC (N = 67; mean age 37 ± 8 years). The main outcome measures were the costs of health care utilization during the first follow-up year and the costs of productivity loss during the second and the third follow-up year. At the end of the first follow-up year an average investment for the GA intervention of €475 per worker, only €83 more than health care utilization costs in UC group, yielded an average savings of at least €999 (95% CI: −1,073; 3,115) due to a reduction in productivity loss. The potential cumulative savings were an average of €1,661 (95% CI: −4,154; 6,913) per worker over a 3-year follow-up period. It may be concluded that the GA intervention for non-specific LBP is a cost-beneficial return-to-work intervention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Courtney TK, Matz S, Webster BS (2002) Disabling occupational injury in the US construction industry, 1996. J Occup Environ Med 44:1161–1168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dutch Central Organisation for Health Care Charge, Utrecht (1998) Tariffs for medical specialist, excluding psychiatrists. Supplement to tariffs decision number 5600-1900-1 from 10 December 1998 [in Dutch: Het tariefboek voor medisch specialist, exclusief psychiaters. De bijlage bij tariefbeschikking 5600-1900-1 d.d. 10 december 1998]

  3. Elders LA, Burdorf A (2004) Prevalence, incidence, and recurrence of low back pain in scaffolders during a 3-year follow-up study. Spine 29:101–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Elders LA, van der Beek AJ, Burdorf A (2000) Return to work after sickness absence due to back disorders—a systematic review on intervention strategies. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 73:339–348

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gatchel RJ, Polatin PB, Noe C, Gardea M, Pulliam C, Thompson J (2003) Treatment- and cost-effectiveness of early intervention for acute low-back pain patients: a one-year prospective study. J Occup Rehabil 13:1–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Goetzel RZ, Hawkins K, Ozminkowski RJ, Wang S (2003) The health and productivity cost burden of the “top 10” physical and mental health conditions affecting six large U.S. employers in 1999. J Occup Environ Med 45:5–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hagen EM, Eriksen HR, Ursin H (2000) Does early intervention with a light mobilization program reduce long-term sick leave for low back pain? Spine 25:1973–1976

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hagen EM, Grasdal A, Eriksen HR (2003) Does early intervention with a light mobilization program reduce long-term sick leave for low back pain: a 3-year follow-up study. Spine 28:2309–2315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Indahl A, Velund L, Reikeraas O (1995) Good prognosis for low back pain when left untampered. A randomized clinical trial. Spine 20:473–477

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Indahl A, Haldorsen EH, Holm S, Reikeras O, Ursin H (1998) Five-year follow-up study of a controlled clinical trial using light mobilization and an informative approach to low back pain. Spine 23:2625–2630

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Karjalainen K, Malmivaara A, Mutanen P, Roine R, Hurri H, Pohjolainen T (2004) Mini-intervention for subacute low back pain: two-year follow-up and modifiers of effectiveness. Spine 29:1069–1076

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kessler RC, Adler L, Ames M, et al (2005) The World Health Organization Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS): a short screening scale for use in the general population. Psychol Med 35:245–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Koopmanschap MA (2005) PRODISQ: a modular questionnaire on productivity and disease for economic evaluation studies. Expert Rev Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res 5(1):23–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lindstrom I, Ohlund C, Eek C, et al (1992) The effect of graded activity on patients with subacute low back pain: a randomized prospective clinical study with an operant-conditioning behavioral approach. Phys Ther 72:279–290

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Loisel P, Abenhaim L, Durand P, et al (1997) A population-based, randomized clinical trial on back pain management. Spine 22:2911–2918

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Loisel P, Lemaire J, Poitras S, et al (2002) Cost–benefit and cost–effectiveness analysis of a disability prevention model for back pain management: a six year follow up study. Occup Environ Med 59:807–815

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Maetzel A, Li L (2002) The economic burden of low back pain: a review of studies published between 1996 and 2001. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 16:23–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Maniadakis N, Gray A (2000) The economic burden of back pain in the UK. Pain 84:95–103

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Oostenbrink J, Koopmanschap M, van Rutten F (2000) Handbook for cost studies, methods and guidelines for economic evaluation in health care (in Dutch: Handleiding voor kostenonderzoek, methoden en richtlijnprijzen voor economische evaluaties in de gezondheidszorg). Health Care Insurance Council

  20. Perez A, Dennis RJ, Gil JF, Rondon MA, Lopez A (2002) Use of the mean, hot deck and multiple imputation techniques to predict outcome in intensive care unit patients in Colombia. Stat Med 21:3885–3896

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Staal JB, Hlobil H, Twisk JW, Smid T, Koke AJ, van Mechelen W (2004) Graded activity for low back pain in occupational health care: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Int Med 140:77–84

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Taxe report (2000) Z-index (in Dutch). The Hague

  23. Williams DA, Feuerstein M, Durbin D, Pezzullo J (1998) Health care and indemnity costs across the natural history of disability in occupational low back pain. Spine 23:2329–2336

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Woolf AD, Pfleger B (2003) Burden of major musculoskeletal conditions. Bull World Health Organ 81:646–656

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

Grant support: by the Dutch Health Insurance Executive Council (CVZ), grant DPZ 169/0.

Author information

Author notes

  1. J. Bart Staal

    Present address: Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200, Maastricht, The Netherlands

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KLM Health Services, Postbus 7700 (SPL/AG), 1117 ZL Luchthaven, Schiphol, The Netherlands

    Hynek Hlobil & Tjabe Smid

  2. Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Hynek Hlobil, Kimi Uegaki, J. Bart Staal, Tjabe Smid & Willem van Mechelen

  3. Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Hynek Hlobil, Kimi Uegaki, J. Bart Staal, Martine C. de Bruyne, Tjabe Smid & Willem van Mechelen

  4. Research Centre Body @ Work TNO VUmc, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Willem van Mechelen

Authors
  1. Hynek Hlobil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kimi Uegaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Bart Staal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Martine C. de Bruyne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tjabe Smid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Willem van Mechelen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hynek Hlobil.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hlobil, H., Uegaki, K., Staal, J.B. et al. Substantial sick-leave costs savings due to a graded activity intervention for workers with non-specific sub-acute low back pain. Eur Spine J 16, 919–924 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-006-0283-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-006-0283-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation