Effectiveness and cost-utility of a multifaceted eHealth strategy to improve back pain beliefs of patients with non-specific low back pain: a cluster randomised trial

Suman, Arnela; Schaafsma, Frederieke; Dongen, Johanna M. van; Elders, Petra; Buchbinder, Rachelle; Tulder, Maurits W. van; Anema, Johannes R.

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030879

Cited by 29 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ten studies were RCTs evaluating the effect of eHealth interventions on the duration of sick leave. 8 , 22 , 26 , 53 - 59 One study used qualitative interviews, 60 one study used a time-series analysis, 61 and one study used a mixed methods design. 7 In four studies, the main aim was to explore the feasibility or acceptability of the eHealth intervention.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five groups were employees who were sick-listed due to a particular diagnosis or health condition, while the sixth population group included employees who were sick-listed due to various diagnoses. Five eHealth interventions were provided for employees who were sick-listed due to common mental disorders, 8 , 54 , 55 , 58 , 63 two eHealth interventions for employees with gynecological conditions, 22 , 53 three eHealth interventions for employees with musculoskeletal conditions, 59 , 60 , 62 one eHealth intervention for employees scheduled for abdominal surgery, 57 and one eHealth intervention for cancer survivors. 7 Three of the identified studies reported on an eHealth intervention for employees sick-listed due to various diagnoses; one of the studies included employees with musculoskeletal pain, fatigue, or common mental disorders, 56 and two studies included employees sick-listed due to any type of diagnosis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The contexts for the eHealth interventions were the following: the workplace 8 , 26 , 55 , 60 , 61 , 63 ; the health sector, either primary 54 , 59 or secondary care 7 , 22 , 53 , 56 , 57 ; the local community (in a clinic or at home) 62 ; and a statutory health insurance company. 58 For the studies taking place in an occupational context, the workplace involvement in the intervention varied.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 7 Two studies were mainly focused on self-management, one with help from relevant stakeholders (employer, general physician, and occupational physician). 59 , 63 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four studies reported eHealth programs mainly delivered by telephone, 55 , 56 , 61 , 62 and 10 programs were web-based. 7 , 8 , 22 , 26 , 53 , 54 , 57 - 60 Of these, five eHealth interventions had a blended approach, such as a web-based program and email or telephone feedback, 58 website and email support, 8 personalized web-based feedback and email, 26 website and social media platforms, 59 and website and a mobile application. 57 One study used a smartphone app–based intervention.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation: a scoping review

Johnsen

Johansen²,

Momsen

et al. 2021

JBI Evidence Synthesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of this scoping review was to identify studies combining the concepts of eHealth and work participation for sick-listed employees across diagnostic groups in health care and workplace contexts. Introduction: There is an increased demand for better health care services and technologies, and eHealth is proposed as a useful tool to improve efficiency and reduce costs. eHealth functions at the intersection of medical informatics, public health, and business, and may be a promising solution for managing the process of return to work among employees on sick leave. Assessment of work outcomes is essential in evaluating the effectiveness of health services, and there is a need to map the research literature on existing eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation. Inclusion criteria: This scoping review considered studies combining two core concepts: eHealth and work participation. It considered studies on eHealth interventions for employees (18 to 65 years of age) on sick leave due to any type of diagnosis or disability, conducted by any stakeholder in workplace or health care contexts and in any country. Empirical data from both quantitative and qualitative studies were included. Methods: Published and unpublished studies from January 1, 2008, to August 21, 2020, written in English were included in this review. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, WHO clinical registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov. A three-step search strategy was followed. Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers and undertaken using an extraction tool developed specifically for the scoping review objectives. Results: This review identified 15 studies eligible for inclusion. Four studies delivered the eHealth intervention by telephone, while 10 interventions were web-based. Of the web-based interventions, five had a blended approach, such as website and email support, or website and social media platforms. One study used an app-based intervention. Only eight studies targeted employees sick-listed due to common sick leave diagnoses, such as common mental disorders and musculoskeletal disorders. The workplace context was the target of the eHealth intervention in seven studies, although the intervention was still delivered by health personnel such as therapists or occupational physicians. Collaboration on individual cases between the health professional, employer, and employee to facilitate work participation seemed to be rare. Four studies reported both a theoretical and an empirical base for the intervention used. Conclusions: This review demonstrated that the use of eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation is limited, and there is a need for future studies on the use of eHealth technology for this purpose. Developing eHealth interventions specifically for populations at risk of long-term...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 7 Two studies were mainly focused on self-management, one with help from relevant stakeholders (employer, general physician, and occupational physician). 59 , 63 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation: a scoping review

Johnsen

Johansen²,

Momsen

et al. 2021

JBI Evidence Synthesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Psychological therapies delivered remotely for the management of chronic pain (excluding headache) in adults

Rosser,

Fisher,

Janjua

et al. 2023

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health Economic Evaluation Alongside Stepped Wedge Trials: A Methodological Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Recently, there has been an increase in use of the stepped wedge trial (SWT) design in the context of health services research, due to its pragmatic and methodological advantages over the parallel group design. Our objective was to summarise the statistical methods used when conducting economic evaluations alongside SWTs. Methods:A systematic literature search extending to February 2020 was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and NHS-EED databases to find and evaluate studies where there was an intention to conduct an economic evaluation alongside a SWT. Studies were assessed for their eligibility, findings, reporting of statistical methods and quality of reporting. Results:Of the 586 studies retrieved from the literature search, 69 studies were identified and included in this systematic review. 54 studies were published protocols, with eight economic evaluations and seven studies reporting full trial results. Included studies varied in terms of their reporting of statistical methods, in both detail and methodology. There were 34 studies that did not report any statistical methods for the economic evaluation and only 16 studies reported appropriate methods, mainly using some form of mixed/multilevel models and two used seemingly unrelated regression. 12 studies reported the use of generic bootstrap methods and other modelling techniques whilst the remaining studies failed to appropriately account for clustering, correlation or adjusted for time. Conclusions:The use of appropriate statistical methods that account for time, clustering, and correlation between costs and outcomes is an important part of SWT health economics analysis that will benefit from an effort in communicating the methods available and their performance. Key points for Decision Makers• In this methodological systematic review we have identified 69 papers reporting stepped wedge trials protocols (n=54), results (n=7) or economic evaluations (n=8).• Statistical methods of economic evaluations alongside stepped wedge trials were often poorly reported, lacking detail and methodology. Only 16 studies reported the use (or intention to use) multilevel/mixed models, 2 seemingly unrelated regression and 8 generic bootstrap.• It is important that appropriate statistical analyses that account for time, clustering and correlation between costs and outcomes -such as bivariate multilevel/mixed models, seemingly unrelated regressions, and the two-stage bootstrap methodare used.

show abstract

Effectiveness and cost-utility of a multifaceted eHealth strategy to improve back pain beliefs of patients with non-specific low back pain: a cluster randomised trial

Cited by 29 publications

References 47 publications

eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation: a scoping review

eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation: a scoping review

Psychological therapies delivered remotely for the management of chronic pain (excluding headache) in adults

Health Economic Evaluation Alongside Stepped Wedge Trials: A Methodological Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About