@article{SemrauHentschkeBuchmannetal.2015,
  author    = {Semrau, Jana and Hentschke, Christian and Buchmann, Jana and Meng, Karin and Vogel, Heiner and Faller, Hermann and Bork, Hartmut and Pfeifer, Klaus},
  title     = {Long-term effects of interprofessional biopsychosocial rehabilitation for adults with chronic non-specific low back pain: a multicentre, quasi-experimental study},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {3},
  doi       = {10.1371/ journal.pone.0118609},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-143594},
  pages     = {e0118609},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Background Improvement of the long-term effectiveness of multidisciplinary ortho-paedic rehabilitation (MOR) in the management of chronic non-specific low back pain (CLBP) remains a central issue for health care in Germany. We developed an interprofessional and interdisciplinary, biopsychosocial rehabilitation concept named "PASTOR" to promote self-management in adults with CLBP and compared its effectiveness with the current model of MOR. Methods A multicentre quasi-experimental study with three measurement time points was implemented. 680 adults aged 18 to 65 with CLBP were assed for eligibil-ity in three inpatient rehabilitation centres in Germany. At first the effects of the MOR, with a total extent of 48 hours (control group), were assessed. Thereafter, PASTOR was implemented and evaluated in the same centres (intervention group). It consisted of six interprofessional modules, which were provided on 12 days in fixed groups, with a total extent of 48 hours. Participants were assessed with self-report measures at baseline, discharge, and 12 months for functional ability (primary outcome) using the Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire (FFbH-R) and vari-ous secondary outcomes (e.g. pain, health status, physical activity, pain coping, pain-related cognitions). Results In total 536 participants were consecutively assigned to PASTOR (n=266) or MOR (n=270). At 12 months, complete data of 368 participants was available. The adjusted between-roup difference in the FFbH-R at 12 months was 6.58 (95\% CI 3.38 to 9.78) using complete data and 3.56 (95\% CI 0.45 to 6.67) using available da-ta, corresponding to significant small-to-medium effect sizes of d=0.42 (p<0.001) and d=0.10 (p=0.025) in favour of PASTOR. Further improvements in secondary out-comes were also observed in favour of PASTOR. Conclusion The interprofessional and interdisciplinary, biopsychosocial rehabilita-tion program PASTOR shows some improvements of the long-term effectiveness of inpatient rehabilitation in the management of adults with CLBP. Further insights into mechanisms of action of complex intervention programs are required.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HessMengSchulteetal.2020,
  author    = {Heß, Verena and Meng, Karin and Schulte, Thomas and Neuderth, Silke and Bengel, J{\"u}rgen and Faller, Hermann and Schuler, Michael},
  title     = {Prevalence and predictors of cancer patients' unexpressed needs in the admission interview of inpatient rehabilitation},
  series = {Psycho-Oncology},
  volume    = {29},
  journal   = {Psycho-Oncology},
  number    = {10},
  doi       = {10.1002/pon.5450},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-228369},
  pages     = {1549 -- 1556},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Objective The admission interview in oncological inpatient rehabilitation might be a good opportunity to identify cancer patients' needs present after acute treatment. However, a relevant number of patients may not express their needs. In this study, we examined (a) the proportion of cancer patients with unexpressed needs, (b) topics of unexpressed needs and reasons for not expressing needs, (c) correlations of not expressing needs with several patient characteristics, and (d) predictors of not expressing needs. Methods We enrolled 449 patients with breast, prostate, and colon cancer at beginning and end of inpatient rehabilitation. We obtained self-reports about unexpressed needs and health-related variables (quality of life, depression, anxiety, adjustment disorder, and health literacy). We estimated frequencies and conducted correlation and ordinal logistic regression analyses. Results A quarter of patients stated they had "rather not" or "not at all" expressed all relevant needs. Patients mostly omitted fear of cancer recurrence. Most frequent reasons for not expressing needs were being focused on physical consequences of cancer, concerns emerging only later, and not knowing about the possibility of talking about distress. Not expressing needs was associated with several health-related outcomes, for example, emotional functioning, adjustment disorder, fear of progression, and health literacy. Depression measured at the beginning of rehabilitation showed only small correlations and is therefore not sufficient to identify patients with unexpressed needs. Conclusions A relevant proportion of cancer patients reported unexpressed needs in the admission interview. This was associated with decreased mental health. Therefore, it seems necessary to support patients in expressing needs.},
  language  = {en}
}