Meta-analysis of psychological interventions for chronic low back pain.

The purpose of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the efficacy of psychological interventions for adults with noncancerous chronic low back pain (CLBP). The authors updated and expanded upon prior meta-analyses by using broad definitions of CLBP and psychological intervention, a broad data search strategy, and state-of-the-art data analysis techniques. All relevant controlled clinical trials meeting the inclusion criteria were identified primarily through a computer-aided literature search. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and articles for inclusion criteria and extracted relevant data. Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated by using a random effects model. Outcomes included pain intensity, emotional functioning, physical functioning (pain interference or pain-specific disability, health-related quality of life), participant ratings of global improvement, health care utilization, health care provider visits, pain medications, and employment/disability compensation status. A total of 205 effect sizes from 22 studies were pooled in 34 analyses. Positive effects of psychological interventions, contrasted with various control groups, were noted for pain intensity, pain-related interference, health-related quality of life, and depression. Cognitive-behavioral and self-regulatory treatments were specifically found to be efficacious. Multidisciplinary approaches that included a psychological component, when compared with active control conditions, were also noted to have positive short-term effects on pain interference and positive long-term effects on return to work. The results demonstrated positive effects of psychological interventions for CLBP. The rigor of the methods used, as well as the results that reflect mild to moderate heterogeneity and minimal publication bias, suggest confidence in the conclusions of this review.     

Resolving Compensation Disputes with Three-party Job Evaluation

Des conflits naissent dans les organisations a propos du montant de la retribution versee aux titulaires de certains postes. Aux Etats-Unis par exem-ple, le probleme de la contribution-retribution a provoque recemment plusieurs conflits autour des postes traditionnellement reserves aux femmes. Mediation et arbitrage sont les procedures habituellement retenues, mais une evaluation du travail regroupant trois partenaires est une solution originate dont les retombees favorables sur l'organisation depassent la resolution d'un conflit particulier.
Un groupe tripartite a exploite pour 1'evaluation du travail des dimensions pourvues d'echelles precises. Des equipes de deux personnes representant les parties adverses ont evalue des postes "convenablement retribues" a partir des dimensions sus-mentionnees. Les donnees ont été statistiquement synthetisees. Des equipes de deux personnes ont ensuite evalue tous les postes defendus par le syndicat implique dans le conflit. Cet eventail de postes incluait ceux qui etaient en litige.
Une tierce partie neutre devait conseiller les adversaires dans l'application d'une methode d'evaluation du travail qui resolvait le conflit, depistait les postes susceptibles de poser probleme a l'avenir et fournissait un moyen pour retribuer equitablement les nouveaux postes.