Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

De la recherche à l’amélioration des pratiques en prévention d’incapacité au travail

From research to practice in work disability prevention

  • Article Original / Original Article
  • Published:
Douleur et Analgésie

Résumé

Les lombalgies provoquent l’exclusion professionnelle d’un certain nombre de patients incapables de conserver ou de reprendre leur travail. Malgré l’existence de recommandations pour la pratique clinique et de programmes de retour au travail efficaces, ceux-ci sont faiblement utilisés. Il existe de nombreuses barrières à l’amélioration des pratiques en prévention d’incapacité au travail chez les professionnels de la santé, les organismes d’assurance maladie et dans le monde du travail. Le dynamisme de la recherche devrait contribuer à leur amélioration.

Abstract

Low back pain may provoke work loss among patients who are unable to stay at work or to resume their work. Evidence-based clinical guidelines and effective return-to-work programs are under utilised even when available. There are many barriers that impede best practices in work disability prevention among the stakeholders involved in the health sector, the social insurance system and the workplaces. Research advances should contribute to better practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Références

  1. Loi no 2004-806 du 9 août 2004 relative à la politique de santé publique parue au J.O. no 185 du 11 août 2004.

  2. Anema JR, van der Giezen AM, Buijs PC, van Mechelen W (2002) Ineffective disability management by doctors is an obstacle for return-to-work: a cohort study on low back pain patients sicklisted for 3–4 months. Occup Environ Med 59: 729–33

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Baril-Gingras G, Bellemare M, Brun J-P (2006) Interventions externes en santé et en sécurité du travail: Influence du contexte de l’établissement sur l’implantation de mesures préventives. Relations industrielles / Industrial relations 61: 9–4

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baril R, Clarke J, Friesen M, et al. (2003) Management of returnto-work programs for workers with musculoskeletal disorders: a qualitative study in three Canadian provinces. Soc Sci Med 57: 2101–2114

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Berthelette D, Baril R (2002) Les dimensions des interventions organisationnelles de maintien du lien d’emploi des travailleurs victimes de lésions professionnelles. PISTES 4: 1–27

    Google Scholar 

  6. Burton AK, Balague F, Cardon G, et al. (2006) Chapter 2. European guidelines for prevention in low back pain. Eur Spine J 15: S136–68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, et al. (1999) Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement.[see comment]. JAMA 282: 1458–65

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Caillard J-F (2005) Les troubles musculo-squelettiques d’origine professionnelle: une nouvelle épidémie. BEH 44–45: 217

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chenot J-F, Scherer M, Becker A, et al. (2008) Acceptance and perceived barriers of implementing a guideline for managing low back in general practice. Implement Sci 3: 7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dahan R, Borkan J, Brown J-B, et al. (2007) The challenge of using the low back pain guidelines: a qualitative research. J Eval Clin Pract 13: 616–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dahan R, Reis S, Borkan J, et al. (2008) Is knowledge a barrier to implementing low back pain guidelines? Assessing the knowledge of Israeli family doctors. J Eval Clin Pract 14: 785–91

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Daniellou F, Caroly S, Coutarel F, et al. (2008) La prévention durable des TMS: Quels freins ? Quels leviers d’action ? Direction Générale du Travail / Ministère de l’emploi, de la cohésion sociale et du logement, Paris

  13. Durand MJ, Loisel P, Hong QN, Charpentier N (2002) Helping clinicians in work disability prevention: the work disability diagnosis interview. J Occup Rehab 12: 191–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Espeland A, Baerheim A (2003) Factors affecting general practitioners’ decisions about plain radiography for back pain: implications for classification of guideline barriers—a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 3: 8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Eurogip (2006) Les troubles musculo-squelettiques en Europe: Définitions et statistiques. Paris

  16. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2007) Work-related musculoskeletal disorders: Back to work. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  17. Franche RL, Baril R, Shaw W, et al. (2005) Workplace-Based Return-to-Work Interventions: Optimizing the Role of Stakeholders in Implementation and Research. J Occup Rehab 15: 525–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Franche RL, Cullen K, Clarke J, et al. (2005) Workplace-Based Return-to-Work Interventions: A Systematic Review of the Quantitative Literature. J Occup Rehab 15: 607–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Frank J, Brooker A, DeMaio S, et al. (1996) Disability resulting from occupational low back pain. Part II: What do we know about secondary prevention? A review of the scientific evidence on prevention after disability begins. Spine 21: 2918–29

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Frank J, Sinclair S, Hoggjohnson S, et al. (1998) Preventing Disability From Work-Related Low-Back Pain — New Evidence Gives New Hope — If We Can Just Get All the Players Onside. Cmaj 158: 1625–1631

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Grol R (1997) Beliefs and evidence in changing clinical practice. Bmj 315: 418–21

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Haines A, Kuruvilla S, Borchert M (2004) Bridging the implementation gap between knowledge and action for health. Bull World Health Organ 82: 724–733

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lindström I, Ohlund C, Eek C, et al. (1992) The effect of graded activity on patients with subacute low back pain: a randomized prospective clinical study with an operant-conditioning behavioral approach... including commentary by Nelson RM with author response. Phys Ther 72: 279–293

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lippel K (1999) Therapeutic and anti-therapeutic consequences of workers’ compensation. Int J Law Psychiatry 22: 521–46

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lippel K (2007) Workers describe the effect of the workers’ compensation process on their health: A Québec study. Int J Law Psychiatry 30: 427–443

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lippel K, Lefebvre M-C, Schmidt C, Caron J (2005) Traiter la réclamation ou traiter la personne ? Les effets du processus sur la santé des personnes victimes de lésions professionnelles. UQAM, Montréal

    Google Scholar 

  27. Loisel P, Abenhaim L, Durand P, et al. (1997) A population-based, randomized clinical trial on back pain management. Spine. 22: 2911–8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Loisel P, Buchbinder R, Hazard R, et al. (2005) Prevention of Work Disability Due to Musculoskeletal Disorders: The Challenge of Implementing Evidence. J Occup Rehab 15: 507–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Loisel P, Durand M, Berthelette D, et al. (2001) Disability prevention: new paradigm for the management of occupational back pain. Disease Management & Health Outcomes 9: 351–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Mayer H, et al. (1987) A prospective two-year study of functional restoration in industrial low back injury: an objective assessment procedure. JAMA 258: 1763–7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mayer TG, Polatin P, Smith B, et al. (1995) Spine Rehabilitation — Secondary and Tertiary Nonoperative Care. Spine 20: 2060–2066

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ministère de l’emploi du travail et de la cohésion sociale (2005) Plan Santé au travail 2005–2009. Paris

  33. Nachemson A (1983) Work for all. For those with low back pain as well. Clin Orthop: 77–85

  34. Poiraudeau S, Rannou F, Revel M (2007) Intérêts du réentraînement à l’effort dans la lombalgie: le concept de restauration fonctionnelle. Ann Readapt Med Phys 50: 419–4

    Google Scholar 

  35. Roquelaure Y, Ha C, Leclerc A, et al. (2005) Surveillance des principaux troubles musculo-squelettiques et de l’exposition au risque dans les entreprises en 2002 et 2003. BEH 44–45: 224–226

    Google Scholar 

  36. Saillour-Glénisson F, Michel P (2003) Facteurs individuels et collectifs associés à l’application des recommandations de pratique clinique par le corps médical. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 51: 65–80

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schers H, Braspenning J, Drijver R, et al. (2000) Low back pain in general practice: reported management and reasons for not adhering to the guidelines in The Netherlands. Br J Gen Pract 50: 640–4

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Schers H, Wensing M, Huijsmans Z, et al. (2001) Implementation Barriers for General Practice Guidelines on Low Back Pain: A Qualitative Study. Spine 26: E348–E353

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Spitzer W (1987) Scientific approach to the assessment and management of activity-related spinal disorders. A monograph for clinicians. Report of the Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders. Spine 12: S1–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. van Oostrom SH, Driessen MT, de Vet HCW, et al. (2009) Workplace interventions for preventing work disability. Cochrane Database Syst Rev

  41. van Tulder M, Koes B, Bouter L (1995) A cost-of-illness study of back pain in The Netherlands. Pain 62: 233–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Waddell G (1987) 1987 Volvo award in clinical sciences. A new clinical model for the treatment of low-back pain. Spine 12: 632–44

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Waddell G, (1998) The clinical course of low back pain, in: The Back Pain Revolution, Churchill Livingstone, 103–117

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Domaine Rockefeller, Institut Universitaire de Médecine du Travail de Lyon, 69373, Lyon Cedex 08, France

    Jean-Baptiste Fassier

  2. Ecole de réadaptation de l’Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Canada

    M. -J. Durand

  3. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Université de Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    P. Loisel

Authors
  1. Jean-Baptiste Fassier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. -J. Durand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Loisel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Fassier, JB., Durand, M.J. & Loisel, P. De la recherche à l’amélioration des pratiques en prévention d’incapacité au travail. Douleur analg 22 (Suppl 1), 24–28 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11724-009-0171-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11724-009-0171-2

Mots clés

Keywords

Search

Navigation