Startseite Multidisciplinary Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation Improves Outcomes for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain
Artikel Open Access

Multidisciplinary Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation Improves Outcomes for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

  • Frances Nanadiego und Michael Seffinger
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 1. Mai 2016

Kamper SJ, Apeldoorn AT, Chiarotto A, et al. Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2015;350:h444. doi:10.1136/bmj.h444.

This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigated the outcomes of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain compared with those of usual care, physical treatment, surgery, and a waitlist. A total of 41 studies were included, in which more than 75% of the participants had low back pain and the diagnosis of disk degeneration or bulging disks, facet joint dysfunction, or sacroiliac joint pain. The sample sizes ranged from 20 to 542 people, with a combined total of 6858 participants. The average age of the participants was between 40 and 45 years. Articles were excluded if the chronic low back pain resulted from any form of inflammatory articular disease.

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation (MR) intervention involved a physical component alongside a psychological or social- or work-targeted component. Usual care varied according to physician. Physical treatments included electrotherapeutic modalities; aerobic, stretching, and strengthening exercises; and manual therapies, but not osteopathic manipulation. The primary measured outcomes were pain, disability, and work absenteeism.

Sixteen RCTs measured the effects of MR vs usual care. Moderate-quality evidence showed that MR was more effective than usual care for long-term pain (7 trials, n=821) and disability (6 trials, n=722) but that MR had no effect above that of usual care in regard to work absenteeism (7 trials, n=1360).

Nineteen RCTs compared the outcomes of MR vs physical treatment. Low-quality evidence demonstrated that MR was more effective than physical treatment for long-term pain and disability (10 trials, n=1169). Moderate-quality evidence demonstrated that MR was more effective than physical treatment for work absenteeism (8 trials, n=1006). Low-quality evidence found that MR was not significantly different from surgical procedures in improving pain, disability, or work absenteeism (2 trials, n=423); however, more adverse events were reported in the surgical studies. Three trials provided low-quality evidence that MR was more effective than control (waitlist) in reducing pain and disability.

This review provides moderate- to low-quality evidence demonstrating that MR is more effective than usual care and physical treatment in patients with chronic low back pain. Although osteopathic manipulation studies were not considered, the results are of interest to osteopathic physicians because of the demonstration of the effectiveness of a biopsychosocial approach, which is a cornerstone of osteopathic care.


Western University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Pomona, California

Published Online: 2016-05-01
Published in Print: 2016-05-01

© 2016 American Osteopathic Association

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. BOOK REVIEWS
  2. A View From the Inside: A Collection of Medically Oriented Short Stories
  3. EDITORIAL
  4. ENGAGE Initiative: Showcasing Osteopathic Scholarly Activity
  5. Building Primary Care Research Capacity in a College of Osteopathic Medicine
  6. Correction
  7. Correction
  8. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
  9. Interstate Medical Licensure Compact: Pernicious Myths and Inescapable Facts
  10. AOA COMMUNICATION
  11. Proposed Amendments to the AOA Constitution, Bylaws, and Code of Ethics
  12. ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
  13. Effectiveness of Home Blood Pressure Monitoring Among Low-Income Adults in Rural Appalachia
  14. CLINICAL REVIEW
  15. Is Meat Killing Us?
  16. MEDICAL EDUCATION
  17. Premedical Students’ Attitudes Toward Primary Care Medicine
  18. SPECIAL COMMUNICATION
  19. Growing Research Among Osteopathic Residents and Medical Students: A Consortium-Based Research Education Continuum Model
  20. CASE REPORT
  21. Intact Cornual Ectopic Pregnancy and Dermoid Cyst With Intraoperative Rupture
  22. Transient Ischemic Attack After Foam Sclerotherapy in a Woman With a Patent Foramen Ovale
  23. THE SOMATIC CONNECTION
  24. Eye Contact, Appetite, and Vomiting Improved in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder After Visceral Osteopathic Technique
  25. Postural Balance and Gait Improved With an Osteopathic Intervention in a Special Needs Population
  26. Significant Benefit Shown After Lumbar Disk Surgery Rehabilitation by Inclusion of Osteopathic Intervention
  27. Spinal Mobilization Has Peripheral Vasodilation Effects
  28. Multidisciplinary Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation Improves Outcomes for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain
  29. Manual Therapy for Hamstring Hypertonicity Improves Temporomandibular Dysfunction in Athletes
  30. CLINICAL IMAGES
  31. Aseptic Splenic Abscess and Sweet Syndrome
  32. IN YOUR WORDS
  33. The Benefits of Being a Patient
Heruntergeladen am 12.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.7556/jaoa.2016.068/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen