Prognostic factors for the improvement of pain and disability following multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic neck pain.
Neck pain
Outcome assessment (health care)
Pain clinics
Prognosis
Regression analysis
Rehabilitation
Journal
BMC musculoskeletal disorders
ISSN: 1471-2474
Titre abrégé: BMC Musculoskelet Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968565
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Apr 2021
03 Apr 2021
Historique:
received:
11
09
2020
accepted:
24
03
2021
entrez:
4
4
2021
pubmed:
5
4
2021
medline:
15
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Recent 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. In 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. The 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). Future 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Recent 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.
METHODS
METHODS
In 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.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The 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).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Future 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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33812386
doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04194-9
pii: 10.1186/s12891-021-04194-9
pmc: PMC8019506
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
330Références
Eur Spine J. 2012 May;21(5):872-8
pubmed: 22139052
J Rheumatol. 2006 Apr;33(4):764-70
pubmed: 16583479
Clin J Pain. 2007 Oct;23(8):683-90
pubmed: 17885347
J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Mar;67(3):267-77
pubmed: 24275499
Pain. 2004 Dec;112(3):267-273
pubmed: 15561381
Clin Rehabil. 2017 Jun;31(6):742-752
pubmed: 27246516
Spine J. 2014 Jun 1;14(6):916-24
pubmed: 24200412
Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473-83
pubmed: 1593914
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008 Oct;38(10):640-5
pubmed: 18827326
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2010 Feb;33(2):138-55
pubmed: 20170780
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010 May;40(5):318-23
pubmed: 20436238
Arthritis Rheum. 2003 Apr 15;49(2):156-63
pubmed: 12687505
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Feb;82:128-136
pubmed: 27986610
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996 Mar 15;21(6):741-9
pubmed: 8882698
J Affect Disord. 2020 Aug 1;273:508-516
pubmed: 32560947
J Clin Med. 2019 Aug 15;8(8):
pubmed: 31443149
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2019 Oct;55(5):665-675
pubmed: 30468363
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2015 Apr;51(2):133-41
pubmed: 24896143
Spine J. 2005 Jan-Feb;5(1):24-35
pubmed: 15653082
Intern Emerg Med. 2011 Oct;6(5):413-21
pubmed: 21153893
J Occup Environ Med. 2002 Jul;44(7):677-84
pubmed: 12134532
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Apr;95(4):770-83
pubmed: 24333741
BMJ. 2020 Mar 26;368:m791
pubmed: 32217608
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 28;1:CD004250
pubmed: 25629215
Man Ther. 2009 Dec;14(6):696-701
pubmed: 19632880
J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Sep;27(9):2901-5
pubmed: 26504321
Med Care. 1989 Mar;27(3 Suppl):S178-89
pubmed: 2646488
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Jul;98(7):1407-1434
pubmed: 27984030
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1991 Apr;72(5):338-40
pubmed: 2009054
Z Rheumatol. 2000 Oct;59(5):303-13
pubmed: 11142925
Disabil Rehabil. 2020 Jan;42(2):163-172
pubmed: 30324809
Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1999 Sep-Oct;137(5):437-41
pubmed: 10549122
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017 Jul;47(7):A1-A83
pubmed: 28666405
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014 Apr 16;15:130
pubmed: 24739588
BMJ. 2003 May 17;326(7398):1083-4
pubmed: 12750214
Eur Spine J. 2006 Jun;15(6):834-48
pubmed: 15999284
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2006 Jul;14(7):641-51
pubmed: 16513373
Soc Sci Med. 1995 Nov;41(10):1359-66
pubmed: 8560303
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Jun 1;33(13):1451-8
pubmed: 18520940
Phys Ther. 2007 Jan;87(1):9-23
pubmed: 17142640
Clin J Pain. 2004 Nov-Dec;20(6):447-54
pubmed: 15502689
BMJ. 2017 Aug 14;358:j3221
pubmed: 28807894
J Pain. 2015 Dec;16(12):1288-1299
pubmed: 26400680
Man Ther. 2015 Aug;20(4):592-7
pubmed: 25725590
J Physiother. 2018 Jan;64(1):16-23
pubmed: 29289589
BMJ Open. 2019 Apr 24;9(4):e024557
pubmed: 31023751
Pain Med. 2008 Jul-Aug;9(5):572-80
pubmed: 18565009
Clin Rehabil. 2012 Feb;26(2):142-51
pubmed: 21856722