SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Extended search

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Stålnacke Björn) "

Search: WFRF:(Stålnacke Björn)

  • Result 1-10 of 31
Sort/group result
   
EnumerationReferenceCoverFind
1.
  • Gerdle, Björn, et al. (author)
  • The importance of emotional distress, cognitive behavioural factors and pain for life impact at baseline and for outcomes after rehabilitation - a SQRP study of more than 20,000 chronic pain patients
  • 2019
  • In: Scandinavian Journal of Pain. - : Walter de Gruyter GmbH. - 1877-8860 .- 1877-8879. ; 19:4, s. 693-711
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Background and aims Although literature concerning chronic pain patients indicates that cognitive behavioural variables, specifically acceptance and fear of movement/(re)injury, are related to life impact, the relative roles of these factors in relation to pain characteristics (e.g. intensity and spreading) and emotional distress are unclear. Moreover, how these variables affect rehabilitation outcomes in different subgroups is insufficiently understood. This study has two aims: (1) to investigate how pain, cognitive behavioural, and emotional distress variables intercorrelate and whether these variables can regress aspects of life impact and (2) to analyse whether these variables can be used to identify clinically meaningful subgroups at baseline and which subgroups benefit most from multimodal rehabilitation programs (MMRP) immediately after and at 12-month follow-up. Methods Pain aspects, background variables, psychological distress, cognitive behavioural variables, and two life impact variables were obtained from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation (SQRP) for chronic pain patients. These data were analysed mainly using advanced multivariate methods. Results The study includes 22,406 chronic pain patients. Many variables, including acceptance variables, showed important contributions to the variation in clinical presentations and in life impacts. Based on the statistically important variables considering the clinical presentation, three clusters/subgroups of patients were identified at baseline; from the worst clinical situation to the relatively good situation. These clusters showed significant differences in outcomes after participating in MMRP; the subgroup with the worst situation at baseline showed the most significant improvements. Conclusions Pain intensity/severity, emotional distress, acceptance, and life impacts were important for the clinical presentation and were used to identify three clusters with marked differences at baseline (i.e. before MMRP). Life impacts showed complex relationships with acceptance, pain intensity/severity, and emotional distress. The most significant improvements after MMRP were seen in the subgroup with the lowest level of functioning before treatment, indicating that patients with complex problems should be offered MMRP. Implications This study emphasizes the need to adopt a biopsychosocial perspective when assessing patients with chronic pain. Patients with chronic pain referred to specialist clinics are not homogenous in their clinical presentation. Instead we identified three distinct subgroups of patients. The outcomes of MMRP appears to be related to the clinical presentation. Thus, patients with the most severe clinical presentation show the most prominent improvements. However, even though this group of patients improve they still after MMRP show a complex situation and there is thus a need for optimizing the content of MMRP for these patients. The subgroup of patients with a relatively good situation with respect to pain, psychological distress, coping and life impact only showed minor improvements after MMRP. Hence, there is a need to develop other complex interventions for them.
  •  
2.
  • Gerdle, Björn, et al. (author)
  • Who benefits from multimodal rehabilitation - an exploration of pain, psychological distress, and life impacts in over 35,000 chronic pain patients identified in the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation
  • 2019
  • In: Journal of Pain Research. - : DOVE Medical Press Ltd.. - 1178-7090. ; 12, s. 891-908
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Background: Chronic pain patients frequently suffer from psychological symptoms. There is no consensus concerning the prevalence of severe anxiety and depressive symptoms and the strength of the associations between pain intensity and psychological distress. Although an important aspect of the clinical picture is understanding how the pain condition impacts life, little is known about the relative importance of pain and psychological symptoms for individual's life impact. The aims of this study were to identify subgroups of pain patients; to analyze if pain, psychological distress, and life impact variables influence subgrouping; and to investigate how patients in the subgroups benefit from treatments.Methods: Background variables, pain aspects (intensity/severity and spreading), psychological distress (depressive and anxiety symptoms), and two life impact variables (pain interference and perceived life control) were obtained from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation for chronic pain patients and analyzed mainly using advanced multivariate methods.Results: Based on >35,000 patients, 35%-40% had severe anxiety or depressive symptoms. Severe psychological distress was associated with being born outside Europe (21%-24% vs 6%-8% in the category without psychological distress) and low education level (20.7%-20.8% vs 26%-27% in the category without psychological distress). Dose relationships existed between the two psychological distress variables and pain aspects, but the explained variances were generally low. Pain intensity/severity and the two psychological distress variables were significantly associated (R2=0.40-0.48; P>0.001) with the two life impact variables (pain interference and life control). Two subgroups of patients were identified at baseline (subgroup 1: n=15,901-16,119; subgroup 2: n=20,690-20,981) and the subgroup with the worst situation regarding all variables participated less in an MMRP (51% vs 58%, P<0.001) but showed the largest improvements in outcomes.Conclusion: The results emphasize the need to assess both pain and psychological distress and not take for granted that pain involves high psychological stress in the individual case. Not all patients benefit from MMRP. A better matching between common clinical pictures and the content of MMRPs may help improve results. We only partly found support for treatment resistance in patients with psychological distress burden.
  •  
3.
  • Grooten, Wilhelmus Johannes Andreas, et al. (author)
  • Elaborating on the assessment of the risk of bias in prognostic studies in pain rehabilitation using QUIPS-aspects of interrater agreement
  • 2019
  • In: Diagnostic and Prognostic Research. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2397-7523. ; 3
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Background: Many studies have been performed to identify important prognostic factors for outcomes after rehabilitation of patients with chronic pain, and there is a need to synthesize them through systematic review. In this process, it is important to assess the study quality and risk of bias. The "Quality In Prognosis Studies" (QUIPS) tool has been developed for this purpose and consists of several prompting items categorized into six domains, and each domain is judged on a three-grade scale (low, moderate or high risk of bias). The aim of the present study was to determine the interrater agreement of the risk of bias assessment in prognostic studies of patients with chronic pain using QUIPS and to elaborate on the use of this instrument.Methods: We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis of prognostic factors for long-term outcomes after multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic pain. Two researchers rated the risk of bias in 43 published papers in two rounds (15 and 28 papers, respectively). The interrater agreement and Cohen's quadratic weighted kappa coefficient (κ) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated in all domains and separately for the first and second rounds.Results: The raters agreed in 61% of the domains (157 out of 258), with similar interrater agreement in the first (59%, 53/90) and second rounds (62%, 104/168). The overall weighted kappa coefficient (kappa for all domains and all papers) was weak: κ = 0.475 (95%CI = 0.358-0.601). A "minimal agreement" between the raters was found in the first round, κ = 0.323 (95%CI = 0.129-0.517), but increased to "weak agreement" in the second round, κ = 0.536 (95%CI = 0.390-0.682).Conclusion: Despite a relatively low interrater agreement, QUIPS proved to be a useful tool in assessing the risk of bias when performing a meta-analysis of prognostic studies in pain rehabilitation, since it demands of raters to discuss and investigate important aspects of study quality. Some items were particularly hard to differentiate in-between, and a learning phase was required to increase the interrater agreement. This paper highlights several aspects of the tool that should be kept in mind when rating the risk of bias in prognostic studies, and provides some suggestions on common pitfalls to avoid during this process.Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42016025339; registered 05 February 2016.
  •  
4.
  •  
5.
  • Tseli, Elena, et al. (author)
  • Predictors of multidisciplinary rehabilitation outcomes in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain : protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
  • 2017
  • In: Systematic Reviews. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 2046-4053. ; 6:1
  • Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal pain is a major public health problem. Early prediction for optimal treatment results has received growing attention, but there is presently a lack of evidence regarding what information such proactive management should be based on. This study protocol, therefore, presents our planned systematic review and meta-analysis on important predictive factors for health and work-related outcomes following multidisciplinary rehabilitation (MDR) in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.METHODS: We aim to perform a synthesis of the available evidence together with a meta-analysis of published peer-reviewed original research that includes predictive factors preceding MDR. Included are prospective studies of adults with benign, chronic (> 3 months) musculoskeletal pain diagnoses who have taken part in MDR. In the studies, associations between personal and rehabilitation-based factors and the outcomes of interest are reported. Outcome domains are pain, physical functioning including health-related quality of life, and work ability with follow-ups of 6 months or more. We will use a broad, explorative approach to any presented predictive factors (demographic, symptoms-related, physical, psychosocial, work-related, and MDR-related) and these will be analyzed through (a) narrative synthesis for each outcome domain and (b) if sufficient studies are available, a quantitative synthesis in which variance-weighted pooled proportions will be computed using a random effects model for each outcome domain. The strength of the evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.DISCUSSION: The strength of this systematic review is that it aims for a meta-analysis of prospective cohort or randomized controlled studies by performing an extensive search of multiple databases, using an explorative study approach to predictive factors, rather than building on single predictor impact on the outcome or on predefined hypotheses. In this way, an overview of factors central to MDR outcome can be made and will help strengthen the evidence base and inform a wide readership including health care practitioners and policymakers.SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016025339.
  •  
6.
  • Tseli, Elena, et al. (author)
  • Prognostic Factors for Physical Functioning After Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation in Patients With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
  • 2019
  • In: The Clinical Journal of Pain. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0749-8047 .- 1536-5409. ; 35:2, s. 148-173
  • Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to identify and evaluate prognostic factors for long-term (≥6 mo) physical functioning in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain following multidisciplinary rehabilitation (MDR).MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic searches conducted in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL revealed 25 original research reports, published 1983-2016, (n=9436). Potential prognostic factors relating to initial pain and physical and psychological functioning were synthesized qualitatively and quantitatively in random effects meta-analyses. The level of evidence (LoE) was evaluated with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).RESULTS: Pain-related factors (intensity and chronicity) were not associated with function/disability at long-term follow-up, odds ratio (OR)=0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65-1.07 and OR=0.97; 95% CI, 0.93-1.00, respectively (moderate LoE). A better function at follow-up was predicted by Physical factors; higher levels of initial self-reported functioning, OR=1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.13 (low LoE), and Psychological factors; low initial levels of emotional distress, OR=0.77; 95% CI, 0.65-0.92, low levels of cognitive and behavioral risk factors, OR=0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.93 and high levels of protective cognitive and behavioral factors, OR=1.49; 95% CI, 1.17-1.90 (moderate LoE).DISCUSSION: While pain intensity and long-term chronicity did not predict physical functioning in chronic pain patients after MDR, poor pretreatment physical and psychological functioning influenced the prognosis negatively. Thus, treatment should further target and optimize these modifiable factors and an increased focus on positive, psychological protective factors may perhaps provide an opening for yet untapped clinical gains.
  •  
7.
  •  
8.
  •  
9.
  •  
10.
  • Eklund, Katarina, et al. (author)
  • A cost-utility analysis of multimodal pain rehabilitation in primary healthcare
  • 2021
  • In: Scandinavian Journal of Pain. - : De Gruyter Open. - 1877-8860 .- 1877-8879. ; 1, s. 48-58
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Objectives: Multimodal rehabilitation programs (MMRPs) have been shown to be both cost-effective and an effective method for managing chronic pain in specialist care. However, while the vast majority of patients are treated in primary healthcare, MMRPs are rarely practiced in these settings. Limited time and resources for everyday activities alongside the complexity of chronic pain makes the management of chronic pain challenging in primary healthcare and the focus is on unimodal treatment. In order to increase the use of MMRPs incentives such as cost savings and improved health status in the patient group are needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MMRPs for patients with chronic pain in primary healthcare in two Swedish regions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MMRPs at one-year follow-up in comparison with care as usual for patients with chronic pain in primary healthcare in two Swedish regions.Methods: A cost-utility analysis was performed alongside a prospective cohort study comparing the MMRP with the alternative of continuing with care as usual. The health-related quality of life (HRQoL), using EQ5D, and working situation of 234 participants were assessed at baseline and one-year follow-up. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained while the secondary outcome was sickness absence. An extrapolation of costs was performed based on previous long-term studies in order to evaluate the effects of the MMRP over a five-year time period.Results: The mean (SD) EQ5D index, which measures HRQoL, increased significantly (p<0.001) from 0.34 (0.32) to 0.44 (0.32) at one-year follow-up. Sickness absence decreased by 15%. The cost-utility analysis showed a cost per QALY gained of 18 704 € at one-year follow-up.Conclusions: The results indicate that the MMRP significantly improves the HRQoL of the participants and is a cost-effective treatment for patients with chronic pain in primary healthcare when a newly suggested cost-effectiveness threshold of 19 734 € is implemented. The extrapolation indicates that considerable cost savings in terms of reduced loss of production and gained QALYs may be generated if the effects of the MMRP are maintained beyond one-year follow-up. The study demonstrates potential benefits of MMRPs in primary healthcare for both the patient with chronic pain and the society as a whole. The cost-effectiveness of MMRPs in primary healthcare has scarcely been studied and further long-term studies are needed in these settings.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Result 1-10 of 31
Type of publication
journal article (19)
reports (5)
conference paper (3)
research review (2)
book (1)
other publication (1)
show more...
show less...
Type of content
peer-reviewed (23)
other academic/artistic (6)
pop. science, debate, etc. (2)
Author/Editor
Gerdle, Björn (21)
Stålnacke, Britt-Mar ... (15)
Stålnacke, Britt-Mar ... (11)
Enthoven, Paul (8)
Söderlund, Anne (6)
Boersma, Katja, prof ... (6)
show more...
Äng, Björn (6)
Gerdle, Björn, 1953- (5)
Enthoven, Paul, 1955 ... (4)
Brodda Jansen, Gunil ... (4)
Bergman, Stefan (3)
Hagberg, Mats (3)
Nilsson, Stefan (3)
Strender, Lars-Erik (3)
Ernberg, Malin (3)
Ringqvist, Åsa (3)
Åsenlöf, Pernilla (3)
Schatz, Richard, 196 ... (2)
Linton, Steven J., 1 ... (2)
Kjebon, Olle, 1960- (2)
Westergren, Hans (2)
Lourdudoss, Sebastia ... (2)
Boersma, Katja, 1973 ... (2)
Löfgren, Monika (2)
Jacobsson, Ulf (2)
Rudling, Karin (2)
Sahlen, Klas-Göran, ... (1)
Johansson, Gunnar (1)
Kosek, Eva (1)
Lourdudoss, Sebastia ... (1)
Åsenlöf, Pernilla, 1 ... (1)
Sarenbo, Sirkku (1)
Jakobsson, Ulf (1)
Öberg, Birgitta (1)
Schatz, Richard (1)
Kjebon, Olle (1)
Bäckryd, Emmanuel, D ... (1)
Hesser, Hugo, 1982- (1)
Sundström, Björn, 19 ... (1)
Grelz, Henrik (1)
Andréll, Paulin, 197 ... (1)
Ghafouri, Bijar (1)
Sörlén, Niklas (1)
Freund-Levi, Yvonne, ... (1)
Zethraeus, Björn (1)
Linton, Steven J. (1)
Karlsten, Rolf (1)
Rivano Fischer, Marc ... (1)
Borg, Kristian (1)
Grooten, Wilhelmus J ... (1)
show less...
University
Umeå University (20)
Linköping University (17)
Örebro University (12)
Karolinska Institutet (11)
Högskolan Dalarna (6)
Uppsala University (5)
show more...
Royal Institute of Technology (3)
Mälardalen University (3)
Lund University (3)
University of Gothenburg (1)
Halmstad University (1)
Linnaeus University (1)
show less...
Language
English (22)
Swedish (9)
Research subject (UKÄ/SCB)
Medical and Health Sciences (25)
Engineering and Technology (2)
Social Sciences (2)
Natural sciences (1)

Year

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view