Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Study protocol

Risk assessment for prolonged sickness absence due to musculoskeletal disorders: protocol for a prospective cohort study

Authors: Anne Therese Tveter, Britt Elin Øiestad, Tarjei Langseth Rysstad, Fiona Aanesen, Alexander Tingulstad, Milada Cvancarova Småstuen, Margreth Grotle

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Musculoskeletal disorders are the leading cause of sickness absence and disability pension in Norway. There is strong evidence that long-term sickness absence due to musculoskeletal disorders are associated with a reduced probability of return to work (RTW). A way to meet the economic and resource-demanding challenges related to individual follow-up of this group is to identify and treat those individuals with a high risk of prolonged sickness. The overall purposes of this project are 1) to determine the most accurate screening tool to identify people at a high risk of prolonged sickness absence due to an musculoskeletal disorder, and 2) to investigate severity of musculoskeletal health, health-related quality-of-life, health care utilization, and costs across different risk profiles in people on sick leave due to a musculoskeletal disorder.

Methods

People older than 18 years of age on sick leave for at least 4 weeks due to a musculoskeletal disorder will be invited to participate in this prospective observational cohort study conducted within the Norwegian Welfare and Labor Administration (NAV) system in collaboration with OsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University. The main outcome is sickness absence, obtained from the NAV registry. Data on sickness absence will be retrieved prospectively in the period from study inclusion to 12 months follow-up, and retrospectively 12 months before inclusion in the study. Possible risk factors will be self-reported by the participants at inclusion while health care utilization will be retrieved from registry data. To conduct analyses including 15 to 20 predictor variables, we aim at including 500–600 people on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders.

Discussion

This study may provide tools that can be used to identify individuals with high risk of prolonged sickness absence and may thus be important from both a socioeconomic and individual perspective. Further, the study may give valuable insight into identification of sickness absence profiles and the associations between these profiles and musculoskeletal health status, health-related quality of life and costs.

Trial registration

Retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.​gov (NCT04196634, 27.11.2019).
Literature
1.
Hoy DG, Smith E, Cross M, Sanchez-Riera L, Buchbinder R, Blyth FM, et al. The global burden of musculoskeletal conditions for 2010: an overview of methods. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(6):982–9.CrossRef
2.
GBD 2015 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet (London, England). 2016;388(10053):1545–602.
3.
4.
Statistics Norway. [Flest til fastlegen på grunn av muskel- og skjelettlidelser]. 2018.
5.
Ihlebaek C, Laerum E. Hits most, costs most and gets least. TidsskrNor Laegeforen. 2010;130(21):2106.CrossRef
6.
7.
Breivik H, Eisenberg E, O'Brien T. The individual and societal burden of chronic pain in Europe: the case for strategic prioritisation and action to improve knowledge and availability of appropriate care. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1229.CrossRef
8.
Waddell G, Burton AK. Is work good for your health and well-being? London: The Stationery Office; 2006.
9.
Waddell G, Burton AK. Occupational health guidelines for the management of low back pain at work: evidence review. Occup Med (Oxford, England). 2001;51(2):124–35.CrossRef
10.
Bendix AF, Bendix T, Haestrup C. Can it be predicted which patients with chronic low back pain should be offered tertiary rehabilitation in a functional restoration program? A search for demographic, socioeconomic, and physical predictors. Spine. 1998;23(16):1775–83 discussion 83-4.CrossRef
11.
Hagen KB, Thune O. Work incapacity from low back pain in the general population. Spine. 1998;23(19):2091–5.CrossRef
12.
Hedlund M, Landstad B, Wendelborg C. Challenges in disability Management of Long-Term Sick Workers. Int J Disabil Manag. 2007;2(2):47–56.CrossRef
13.
Cancelliere C, Donovan J, Stochkendahl MJ, Biscardi M, Ammendolia C, Myburgh C, et al. Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews. Chiroprac Manual Ther. 2016;24(1):32.CrossRef
14.
Aasdahl L, Pape K, Vasseljen O, Johnsen R, Fimland MS. Improved expectations about length of sick leave during occupational rehabilitation is associated with increased work participation. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29(3):475–82.CrossRef
15.
Hill JC, Whitehurst DG, Lewis M, Bryan S, Dunn KM, Foster NE, et al. Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2011;378(9802):1560–71.CrossRef
16.
Linton SJ, Nicholas M, MacDonald S. Development of a short form of the Orebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire. Spine. 2011;36(22):1891–5.CrossRef
17.
Hill JC, Afolabi EK, Lewis M, Dunn KM, Roddy E, van der Windt DA, et al. Does a modified STarT Back tool predict outcome with a broader group of musculoskeletal patients than back pain? A secondary analysis of cohort data. BMJ Open. 2016;6(10):e012445.CrossRef
18.
Hill JC, Kang S, Benedetto E, Myers H, Blackburn S, Smith S, et al. Development and initial cohort validation of the Arthritis Research UK musculoskeletal health questionnaire (MSK-HQ) for use across musculoskeletal care pathways. BMJ Open. 2016;6(8):e012331.CrossRef
19.
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25(24):3186–91.CrossRef
20.
Bouwmans C, Krol M, Brouwer W, Severens JL, Koopmanschap MA, Hakkaart L. IMTA Productivity Cost Questionnaire (IPCQ). Value Health. 2014;17(7):A550.CrossRef
21.
Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.CrossRef
22.
23.
Hill JC, Dunn KM, Lewis M, Mullis R, Main CJ, Foster NE, et al. A primary care back pain screening tool: identifying patient subgroups for initial treatment. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(5):632–41.CrossRef
24.
Campbell P, Hill JC, Protheroe J, Afolabi EK, Lewis M, Beardmore R, et al. Keele aches and pains study protocol: validity, acceptability, and feasibility of the Keele STarT MSK tool for subgrouping musculoskeletal patients in primary care. J Pain Res. 2016;9:807–18.CrossRef
25.
Nicolas MK, Costa DSJ, Linton SJ, Main CJ, Shaw WS, Pearce R, et al. Predicting return to work in a heterogeneous sample of recently injured workers using the brief ÖMPSQ-SF. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29(2):295–302.
26.
Hubertsson J, Englund M, Hallgarde U, Lidwall U, Lofvendahl S, Petersson IF. Sick leave patterns in common musculoskeletal disorders--a study of doctor prescribed sick leave. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014;15:176.CrossRef
27.
Brendbekken R, Vaktskjold A, Harris A, Tangen T. Predictors of return-to-work in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: a randomized clinical trial. J Rehabil Med. 2018;50(2):193–9.CrossRef
28.
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(7):737–45.CrossRef
29.
de Vet HC, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL. Measurement in medicine, vol. 2011. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.CrossRef
30.
Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall; 1991.
31.
Aasdahl L, Foldal VS, Standal MI, Hagen R, Johnsen R, Solbjor M, et al. Motivational interviewing in long-term sickness absence: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial followed by qualitative and economic studies. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):756.CrossRef
32.
Muthen B. Latent variable analysis: growth mixture modelling and related techniques for longitudinal data. In: Kaplan D, editor. Handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences. Newbury Park: Sage; 2004.
33.
Aasdahl L, Pape K, Vasseljen O, Johnsen R, Gismervik S, Halsteinli V, et al. Effect of inpatient multicomponent occupational rehabilitation versus less comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation on sickness absence in persons with musculoskeletal- or mental health disorders: a randomized clinical trial. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28(1):170–9.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Risk assessment for prolonged sickness absence due to musculoskeletal disorders: protocol for a prospective cohort study
Authors
Anne Therese Tveter
Britt Elin Øiestad
Tarjei Langseth Rysstad
Fiona Aanesen
Alexander Tingulstad
Milada Cvancarova Småstuen
Margreth Grotle
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03354-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research article

Contact pressure distribution of the hip joint during closed reduction of developmental dysplasia of the hip: a patient-specific finite element analysis

Research article

Intra- and inter-rater reliability of thoracic spine mobility and posture assessments in subjects with thoracic spine pain

Correspondence

Classifications of good versus poor outcome following knee arthroplasty should not be defined using arbitrary criteria

Research article

Radiographic performance depends on the radial glenohumeral mismatch in total shoulder arthroplasty

Research article

Is it possible to define reference values for radiographic parameters evaluating juvenile flatfoot deformity? A case-control study

Research article

Clinical outcome of arthroscopic internal drainage of popliteal cysts with or without cyst wall resection