慢性腰痛患者的职业康复干预:范围回顾。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Gitte Frydenlund, Søren O'Neill, Ole Steen Mortensen, Jens Søndergaaard, Anders Hansen
{"title":"慢性腰痛患者的职业康复干预:范围回顾。","authors":"Gitte Frydenlund, Søren O'Neill, Ole Steen Mortensen, Jens Søndergaaard, Anders Hansen","doi":"10.1007/s10926-025-10308-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Clinical guidelines recommend multidisciplinary rehabilitation for managing chronic LBP. This scoping review maps vocational rehabilitation (VR) interventions delivered within the healthcare sector for individuals with chronic LBP. It explores (1) which professional groups are involved and how they collaborate, (2) the setting, (3) the duration, intensity, and components of interventions, and (4) how work status is assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search across six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, OT Seeker, and Scopus) was conducted in September 2023 and updated in October 2024, following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were included if they involved working age individuals with chronic LBP receiving VR initiated within the healthcare sector. Articles published before 2013, from outside Europe, or with > 50% of participants on sick leave > 12 months were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 7032 records, 26 articles representing 21 studies from seven European countries were included. Interventions varied in duration (1-12 weeks or until return-to-work (RTW) or a new plan was established), intensity (a few hours to 30 h/week), complexity, and follow-up periods (5 weeks to 5 years). Interdisciplinary collaboration was most common (six studies), although descriptions were limited. Interventions ranged from simple to complex, with up to seven components. Nineteen different methods were used to assess work status.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Substantial heterogeneity in intervention design and RTW outcome measures limits comparability and evidence synthesis. Clearer definitions of collaboration and standardized RTW reporting are needed to inform future development of VR in healthcare contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":48035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mapping Vocational Rehabilitation Interventions for People with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Gitte Frydenlund, Søren O'Neill, Ole Steen Mortensen, Jens Søndergaaard, Anders Hansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10926-025-10308-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Clinical guidelines recommend multidisciplinary rehabilitation for managing chronic LBP. This scoping review maps vocational rehabilitation (VR) interventions delivered within the healthcare sector for individuals with chronic LBP. It explores (1) which professional groups are involved and how they collaborate, (2) the setting, (3) the duration, intensity, and components of interventions, and (4) how work status is assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search across six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, OT Seeker, and Scopus) was conducted in September 2023 and updated in October 2024, following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were included if they involved working age individuals with chronic LBP receiving VR initiated within the healthcare sector. Articles published before 2013, from outside Europe, or with > 50% of participants on sick leave > 12 months were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 7032 records, 26 articles representing 21 studies from seven European countries were included. Interventions varied in duration (1-12 weeks or until return-to-work (RTW) or a new plan was established), intensity (a few hours to 30 h/week), complexity, and follow-up periods (5 weeks to 5 years). Interdisciplinary collaboration was most common (six studies), although descriptions were limited. Interventions ranged from simple to complex, with up to seven components. Nineteen different methods were used to assess work status.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Substantial heterogeneity in intervention design and RTW outcome measures limits comparability and evidence synthesis. Clearer definitions of collaboration and standardized RTW reporting are needed to inform future development of VR in healthcare contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-025-10308-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-025-10308-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:腰痛(LBP)是世界范围内导致残疾的主要原因。临床指南推荐多学科康复治疗慢性腰痛。这范围审查地图职业康复(VR)干预措施提供在医疗保健部门的个人慢性腰痛。它探讨了(1)哪些专业团体参与以及他们如何合作,(2)设置,(3)干预的持续时间,强度和组成部分,以及(4)如何评估工作状态。方法:根据PRISMA-ScR指南,于2023年9月对6个数据库(MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、AMED、OT Seeker和Scopus)进行系统检索,并于2024年10月更新。如果研究涉及工作年龄的慢性腰痛患者在医疗保健部门接受VR,则纳入研究。在2013年之前发表的文章,来自欧洲以外的文章,或者有50%的参与者在12个月内请病假的文章被排除在外。结果:7032条记录中,包括来自7个欧洲国家的21项研究的26篇文章。干预措施在持续时间(1-12周或直到恢复工作(RTW)或制定新计划)、强度(几小时至30小时/周)、复杂性和随访时间(5周至5年)方面各不相同。跨学科合作是最常见的(6项研究),尽管描述有限。干预措施从简单到复杂,最多有七个组成部分。19种不同的方法被用来评估工作状态。结论:干预设计和RTW结果测量的实质性异质性限制了可比性和证据合成。需要更明确的协作定义和标准化的RTW报告,以便为医疗保健背景下VR的未来发展提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mapping Vocational Rehabilitation Interventions for People with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review.

Purpose: Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Clinical guidelines recommend multidisciplinary rehabilitation for managing chronic LBP. This scoping review maps vocational rehabilitation (VR) interventions delivered within the healthcare sector for individuals with chronic LBP. It explores (1) which professional groups are involved and how they collaborate, (2) the setting, (3) the duration, intensity, and components of interventions, and (4) how work status is assessed.

Methods: A systematic search across six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, OT Seeker, and Scopus) was conducted in September 2023 and updated in October 2024, following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were included if they involved working age individuals with chronic LBP receiving VR initiated within the healthcare sector. Articles published before 2013, from outside Europe, or with > 50% of participants on sick leave > 12 months were excluded.

Results: Of 7032 records, 26 articles representing 21 studies from seven European countries were included. Interventions varied in duration (1-12 weeks or until return-to-work (RTW) or a new plan was established), intensity (a few hours to 30 h/week), complexity, and follow-up periods (5 weeks to 5 years). Interdisciplinary collaboration was most common (six studies), although descriptions were limited. Interventions ranged from simple to complex, with up to seven components. Nineteen different methods were used to assess work status.

Conclusion: Substantial heterogeneity in intervention design and RTW outcome measures limits comparability and evidence synthesis. Clearer definitions of collaboration and standardized RTW reporting are needed to inform future development of VR in healthcare contexts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: The Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on the rehabilitation, reintegration, and prevention of disability in workers. The journal offers investigations involving original data collection and research synthesis (i.e., scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses). Papers derive from a broad array of fields including rehabilitation medicine, physical and occupational therapy, health psychology and psychiatry, orthopedics, oncology, occupational and insurance medicine, neurology, social work, ergonomics, biomedical engineering, health economics, rehabilitation engineering, business administration and management, and law.  A single interdisciplinary source for information on work disability rehabilitation, the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation helps to advance the scientific understanding, management, and prevention of work disability.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信