Quasi-experimental evaluation assesses effectiveness in employees with low back pain, suggesting feasibility of intervention.
Background While biopsychosocial interventions are effective for low back pain (LBP), implementing them in workplace settings remains challenging due to resource constraints. We adapted a comprehensive biopsychosocial approach into a single, brief, individualized advice session to enhance real-world feasibility. This study aimed to evaluate the reach, adoption, implementation, and preliminary effectiveness of this program using the RE-AIM (Reach, Adoption, Implementation, Effectiveness, and Maintenance) framework. Methods A prospective pre–post quasi-experimental study was conducted in a Japanese insurance company. Employees with LBP were invited to a single 30-min occupational physiotherapy advice session. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and 3 months. Effectiveness was evaluated using mean changes in pain (numerical rating scale) and disability (Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire), supplemented by a responder analysis based on minimal important change (MIC). Results Of 1201 eligible employees, 154 (12.8%) attended the session (Reach), and 68 (44.2%) provided completed the 3-month follow-up (Implementation). Regarding effectiveness, mean pain intensity showed no significant change (+0.12). However, the responder analysis revealed that 17.6% of participants achieved MIC in pain (≥2 points), and 35.3% were classified as meeting MIC in disability (≥2 points). Additionally, the proportion of participants perceiving LBP as the primary cause of productivity loss decreased from 58.8% to 16.2%. Between-group analyses showed no statistically significant differences. Conclusions This quasi-experimental evaluation suggests that a single 30-min workplace physiotherapy advice session is feasible to implement. Effectiveness findings were exploratory: mean pain intensity changed little and between-group differences were not statistically significant, while some attendees who completed follow-up met the MIC threshold for disability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miki et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: