Occup Environ Med

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Published Online First: 26 March 2007. doi:10.1136/oem.2006.029215
Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2007;64:534-540
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
oem.2006.029215v1
64/8/534    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chen, C.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chen, C.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, P.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The recovery patterns of back pain among workers with compensated occupational back injuries

Cynthia Chen, Sheilah Hogg-Johnson, Peter Smith

Institute for Work & Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
MsC Chen
Institute for Work & Health, 481 University Avenue, Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2E9 Canada; cchen{at}iwh.on.ca

Objectives: To investigate the longitudinal patterns of recovery among workers with compensated occupational back injuries.

Methods: A longitudinal cohort study, with one-year follow-up via structured telephone interviews, among respondents off work because of "new" back injuries. Self-reported pain intensity was recorded at baseline and at four follow-up time points over the course of one year. Workers who answered the questionnaire on at least three occasions (n = 678) were classified into clusters according to their patterns of pain intensity over time using a two-step cluster analysis.

Results: Four pain recovery patterns were identified: workers with high levels of pain intensity showing no improvement over time (43%); those experiencing recovery in the first four months with no further improvement or possibly even some deterioration, in the second half year (33%); those experiencing a slow consistent recovery but still with considerable back pain at the end of the follow-up (12%); and those quickly progressing to low level of pain or resolution (12%). Trajectories of average Roland-Morris Disability scores and SF-36 Role of Physical scores for above clusters mapped consistently with the corresponding patterns in pain. However, individuals with fluctuating, recurrent pain patterns showed the shortest cumulative duration on 100% benefit and the earliest return-to-work among other clusters.

Conclusions: Four clinically sensible patterns were identified in this cohort of injured workers, suggesting inter-individual differences in back pain recovery. The results confirm that recurrent or chronic back pain is a typical condition in respondents with new back injuries. Pain intensity and disability scores are good measures of recovery of back pain at the individual level. After initial return-to-work, or cessation of benefits, administrative measures of percentage of respondents back at work, or no longer on benefits, may not accurately reflect an individual’s condition of back pain.








HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.