Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorHarris, Anette
dc.contributor.authorMoe, Trygve Fredrik
dc.contributor.authorEriksen, Hege Randi
dc.contributor.authorTangen, Tone
dc.contributor.authorLie, Stein Atle
dc.contributor.authorTveito, Torill Helene
dc.contributor.authorReme, Silje Endresen
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-05T11:28:52Z
dc.date.available2018-07-05T11:28:52Z
dc.date.created2017-06-21T14:16:47Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationEuropean Journal of Pain. 2017, 21 (8), 1397-1407.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1090-3801
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2504515
dc.description.abstractBackground and Objective: Cognitive‐behavioural treatments (CBT) and physical group exercise (PE) have both shown promising effects in reducing disability and increasing work participation among chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients. A brief cognitive intervention (BI) has previously been demonstrated to reduce work disability in CLBP. The aim of this study was to test if the effect of BI could be further increased by adding either group CBT or group PE. Methods: A total of 214 patients, all sick listed 2–10 months due to CLBP, were randomized to BI (n = 99), BI + group CBT (n = 55) or BI + group PE (n = 60). Primary outcome was increased work participation at 12 months, whereas secondary outcomes included pain‐related disability, subjective health complaints, anxiety, depression, coping and fear avoidance. Results There were no significant differences between the groups in work participation at 12 months follow‐up (χ2 = 1.15, p = 0.56). No significant differences were found on the secondary outcomes either, except for a statistically significant reduction (time by group) in pseudoneurology one domain of subjective health complaints (sleep problems, tiredness, dizziness, anxiety, depression, palpitation, heat flushes) (F2,136 = 3.109, p = 0.048) and anxiety (F2,143 = 4.899, p = 0.009) for the groups BI + group CBT and BI + group PE, compared to BI alone. However, these differences were not significant in post hoc analyses (Scheffé adjusted). Conclusion: There was no support for an effect of the added group CBT or group PE treatments to a brief cognitive intervention in this study of patients on sick leave due to low back pain. Significance: Our study demonstrates that treatments that previously were found to be effective and are included in most treatment guidelines, such as group cognitive‐behavior therapy and exercise, were not effective in this given context compared to a brief, cognitive intervention. This implies that an optimized brief intervention is difficult to outperform in patients on sick leave due to low back pain.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.titleBrief intervention, physical exercise and cognitive behavioural group therapy for patients with chronic low back pain (The CINS trial)nb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionacceptedVersionnb_NO
dc.rights.holder© 2017 European Pain Federation ‐ EFIC®nb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber1397-1407nb_NO
dc.source.volume21nb_NO
dc.source.journalEuropean Journal of Painnb_NO
dc.source.issue8nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ejp.1041
dc.identifier.cristin1477943
cristin.unitcode222,56,3,0
cristin.unitnameInstitutt for helse-, sosial- og velferdsfag
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpostprint
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel