RESUMEN
Purpose To summarize progress of functional capacity evaluation (FCE) research based on the proceedings of the Fourth International FCE Research Conference held in Switzerland on September 21 and 22, 2018. Methods A scientific committee identified key issues in FCE research and developed the program including key note presentations, a call for abstracts, and round table discussions over 2 days. Highlights of the presentations and discussions are summarized in this article. Results Seventy-nine participants from 11 countries attended the conference where 10 keynote lectures and 21 abstracts were presented. There was also an open discussion regarding the need for an International FCE clinical practice guideline (CPG), methods for developing such a guideline, and practical next steps. Full program details and abstracts from this Fourth International FCE Research Conference are available from https://www.sar-reha.ch/interessengemeinschaften/ig-ergonomie.html . Conclusions Researchers and clinicians continue to increase the body of knowledge in the FCE field. A major finding of this conference is the diversity across the different FCE protocols and research groups as well as of the different uses of FCE across cultural and social economic systems. Next steps will include exploring the development of an international, interdisciplinary, evidence-based FCE clinical practice guideline by a committee formed at the conference.
Asunto(s)
Evaluación de Capacidad de Trabajo , Humanos , SuizaRESUMEN
The aim of this study involving 170 patients suffering from non-specific low back pain was to test the validity of the spinal function sort (SFS) in a European rehabilitation setting. The SFS, a picture-based questionnaire, assesses perceived functional ability of work tasks involving the spine. All measurements were taken by a blinded research assistant; work status was assessed with questionnaires. Our study demonstrated a high internal consistency shown by a Cronbach's alpha of 0.98, reasonable evidence for unidimensionality, spearman correlations of >0.6 with work activities, and discriminating power for work status at 3 and 12 months by ROC curve analysis (area under curve = 0.760 (95% CI 0.689-0.822), respectively, 0.801 (95% CI 0.731-0.859). The standardised response mean within the two treatment groups was 0.18 and -0.31. As a result, we conclude that the perceived functional ability for work tasks can be validly assessed with the SFS in a European rehabilitation setting in patients with non-specific low back pain, and is predictive for future work status.
Asunto(s)
Evaluación de la Discapacidad , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/rehabilitación , Recuperación de la Función , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Actividades Cotidianas , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
Return to work (RTW) is the primary goal in the rehabilitation of patients with chronic low back pain. In spite of expensive rehabilitative efforts, many patients do not RTW. To increase cost effectiveness, predictive tests for non-RTW are needed to select patients for rehabilitation. The reliability of these tests must be high, to prevent exclusion of patients who might improve. This study evaluates the reliability and predictive validity of four tests and the following psychosocial factors for non-RTW: nationality, off-work duration, unemployment and work load. It was designed as a prospective cohort study of 99 patients with chronic low back pain. Upon entry, physical work load, time off work, unemployment and nationality were recorded. The study investigated four tests with an anticipated prognostic value for non-RTW: the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS, 9-10 of a maximum of 10), the Step Test and Pseudo Strength Test (precipitous cessation) and Behavioural Signs. After 12 months, the RTW rate was obtained from the physicians responsible for sick-listing by postal survey. The response rate regarding RTW was 91% at 1 year. The RTW rate at 1 year was 20%. All investigated tests significantly correlated with non-RTW. Regression analysis showed that the best prediction of non-RTW was obtained when at least two out of the four tests were positive (positive predictive value 0.97, sensitivity 0.45). Unemployment, time off work, nationality and physical work load were less predictive. The results show that the combination of the four prognostic tests allows a very reliable prognosis of non-RTW. The cost effectiveness of rehabilitation aiming at RTW will, therefore, be increased by excluding patients with two or more positive tests.