| PMC full text: | Published online 2011 Jan 4. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1675-4
|
Table 1
Study characteristics
| Study ID, type and perspective | Study details | Groups |
|---|---|---|
| Hollinghurst et al. [24] | ||
| Type: CEA/CUA | Participants randomised (n): 435a | Usual GP care + or - exercise and behavioural counselling |
| Perspective: healthcare sector, patients, societal | Duration of LBP: chronic or recurrent | Massage + or - exercise and behavioural counselling |
| Length of follow-up: 12 months | Alexander technique (6 lessons) + or - exercise and behavioural counselling | |
| Setting: United Kingdom 2002-2004 | ||
| Jellema et al. [25] | ||
| Type: CEA/CUA | Participants randomised (n): 314 | Usual GP care |
| Perspective: societal | Duration of LBP: <12 weeks | Minimal psychosocial intervention (delivered by GP) |
| Length of follow-up: 12 months | ||
| Setting: The Netherlands 2001-2003 | ||
| Johnson et al. [26] | ||
| Type: CEA/CUA | Participants randomised (n): 234 | Usual GP care |
| Perspective: not stated | Duration of LBP: >3 months | Exercise and education using a cognitive-behavioural approach |
| Length of follow-up: 15 months | ||
| Setting: United Kingdom 2002-2003 | ||
| Karjalainen et al. [22, 23] | ||
| Type and perspective: not stated | Participants randomised (n): 164 | Usual GP care |
| Duration of LBP: >4 weeks but <3 months | Usual GP care plus advice, education and exercise | |
| Length of follow-up: 24 months | Usual GP care plus advice, education and exercise, plus worksite visit | |
| Setting: Finland 1998-2000 | ||
| Kominski et al. [18] | ||
| Type: CMA | Participants randomised (n): 681 | Usual GP care |
| Perspective: not stated | Duration of LBP: mixed | Usual GP care plus physiotherapy |
| Length of follow-up: 18 months | Chiropractic care | |
| Setting: United States 1995-1998 | Chiropractic care with physical modalities | |
| Kovacs et al. [16] | ||
| Type: CEA/CUA | Participants randomised (n): 104 | Usual GP care |
| Perspective: not stated | Duration of LBP: ?14 days | Usual GP care plus neuroreflexotherapy |
| Length of follow-up: 12 months | ||
| Setting: Spain, years not specified | ||
| Loisel et al. [20] | ||
| Type: CEA/CUA and CBA | Participants randomised (n): 130 | Usual GP care |
| Perspective: insurance provider | Duration of LBP: >4 weeks absent from work due to LBP | Clinical rehabilitation (back pain specialist, back school + or - multidisciplinary rehabilitation) |
| Length of follow-up: mean 6.4 years | Occupational intervention (occupation physician and ergonomics intervention) | |
| Setting: Canada 1991-1993 | Clinical rehabilitation plus occupational intervention | |
| Ratcliffe et al. [27] | ||
| Type: CEA/CUA | Participants randomised (n): 241 | Usual GP care |
| Perspective: healthcare sector and societal | Duration of LBP: 4-52 weeks | Acupuncture |
| Length of follow-up: 24 months | ||
| Setting: United Kingdom 1999-2001 | ||
| Seferlis et al. [19] | ||
| Type: CMA | Participants randomised (n): 180 | Usual GP care |
| Perspective: not stated | Duration of LBP: <2 weeks on sick leave due to LBP | Manual therapy |
| Length of follow-up: 12 months | Exercise training | |
| Setting: Sweden, years not specified | ||
| Skouen et al. [21] | ||
| Type: CBA | Participants randomised (n): 211 (195 completed follow up) | Usual GP care |
| Perspective: societal | Duration of LBP: sick leave for at least 8 weeks, or sick-listed for at least 2 months a year for the last 2 years | Light multidisciplinary treatment |
| Length of follow-up: 24 months after the end of treatment | Extensive multidisciplinary treatment | |
| Setting: Norway 1996-1997 | ||
| UK BEAM Trial Team [17] | ||
| Type: CEA/CUA | Participants randomised (n): 1,334 (1,287 included in analysis) | Guideline-based GP care |
| Perspective: healthcare sector | Duration of LBP: at least 4 weeks | Guideline-based GP care plus exercise |
| Length of follow-up: 12 months | Guideline-based GP care plus spinal manipulation | |
| Setting: United Kingdom 1999-2002 | Guideline-based GP care plus combined treatment (spinal manipulation followed by exercise) | |
CEA cost-effectiveness analysis
CMA cost-minimisation analysis
CUA cost-utility analysis
Data from a fourth group is not included in this review as no comparison was made between this group and GP care