You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 16, Issue 4
  • For sick-listed people with chronic low back pain, an integrated care programme costs society less and returns participants to work faster than usual management

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Economic analysis
Cost-effectiveness analysis
For sick-listed people with chronic low back pain, an integrated care programme costs society less and returns participants to work faster than usual management
  1. Duncan J Critchley
  1. Academic Department of Physiotherapy/Division of Health and Social Care Research, School of Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Duncan J Critchley
    Shepherd's House, Guy's Campus, London SE1 1UL, UK; duncan.critchley{at}kcl.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebm1206

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Commentary on: Lambeek LC, Bosmans JE, Van Royen BJ, et al. Effect of integrated care for sick listed patients with chronic low back pain: economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2010;341:c6414.

    Context

    Low back pain disability is the second most common reason for work absence in the UK. Societal costs, all costs attributed to the condition not just medical costs, were £12 billion in the UK in 1998, with the greatest proportion (£11 billion) due to work absence.1 Similar patterns of high societal cost, largely due to work absence, exist throughout the developed world within different healthcare and welfare systems. Despite high societal costs, most back pain trials report clinical outcomes, and the small number of economic evaluations are usually from a healthcare provider's perspective, comparing clinical effectiveness with healthcare cost.

    A multidisciplinary outpatient programme previously demonstrated to be clinically effective was evaluated for cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and cost-benefit from a …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.