Effectiveness of Coordinated Care to Reduce the Prolonged Disability Risk Among Patients Suffering From Low Back Pain in Primary Care (COLOMB)

September 15, 2025 updated by: University Hospital, Angers

Effectiveness of Coordinated Care to Reduce the Risk of Prolonged Disability Among Patients Suffer From Subacute or Recurrent Acute Low Back Pain in Primary Care

Common low back pain affects about 23% of general population and can be associated with psychosocial difficulties and prolonged inability to work. Its management in France mainly depends on general practioners, and sometime on physiotherapists.

A coordinated care between general practioners, physiotherapists and occupational health services would help to improve the care pathway for patients and health professionals.

The main objective is to assess the impact of coordinated primary care and deployed at the territories' level, in subacute or acute recurrent low back pain patients in comparison with the standard care.

Study Overview

Status

Recruiting

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

500

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

      • Bonchamp-lès-Laval, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Bonchamp
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Cédric HAMON, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Annelore DEFOIN, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Margaux RIPAUD, MD
        • Contact:
      • Breteil, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Vaunoise
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • François TANGUY, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Béatrice NEGARET, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Luc GUICHARD, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Béatrice ALLARD COUALAN, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Roxane MORIN, MD
        • Contact:
      • Brûlon, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster BRULON
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Alexandre DE BARBERIN-BARBERINI, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Paul BOULARD, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Claire GASNIER, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Pauline LEFEUVRE, MD
        • Contact:
      • Château-Gontier, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Château Gontier
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Thibault BARBIER, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Pierre DELAHAYE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Claire HAMARD, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Audrey LEPY, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Eric MICHAUD, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Marie Christine SALVATO, MD
        • Contact:
      • Châteauneuf-sur-Sarthe, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Châteauneuf sur Sarthe / Morannes
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Cyril BEGUE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Sylvie MARTEAU, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Anne Charlotte ROCFORT, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Isabelle VIGUE-BOURREAU, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Yoldi BRETT, MD
        • Contact:
      • Clisson, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Clisson
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Didier JUTEL, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Elise KRAI-ASGARALY, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Sabine NAOUR-LEROY, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Emilie BEAGHE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Agnés PLOTEAU, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Sarah NOEL, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Christophe ALLAIN, MD
        • Contact:
      • Conlie, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Conlie
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Guillaume FETIVEAU, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Noémie QUEANT, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Christèle TOURNELLE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Arthur VIGNAUD, MD
        • Contact:
      • Craon, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Craon Renaze Cosse
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Anne PLESSIS, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Charlene LESAGE BESNIER, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Jean Michel MONNIER, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Lydie GENDRY ROSSIGNOL, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Maryline MERIENNE COUSSE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Julien BERTRAND, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Pascal GENDRY, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Rebecca NAUD, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Marine GESLOT, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Florie ALGRAIN, MD
        • Contact:
      • Entrammes, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Entrammes Laval
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Thi phi Bach NGUYEN, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Josselin DELAHAYE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Olivier PIVETEAU, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Romain CLISSON, MD
        • Contact:
      • La Roche-sur-Yon, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Roche sur Yon
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Amandine PELLETIER, MD
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Jeanne QUERE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Angèle DUCRET, MD
        • Contact:
      • Nantes, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Chantenay
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Laure GEGAUFF, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Thomas JAN, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Héloïse SCHMELTZ, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Tom LUCAS, MD
        • Contact:
      • Quévert, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Dinan / Quévert / Plouasne
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Jannice COUDERT, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Florence ADELINE DUFLOT, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Samuel ROGER, MD
        • Contact:
      • Rennes, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Rennes Villejean
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Caroline JEHANNO, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Anna JARNO-JOSSE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Romain NIFENECKER, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Hoël CHARBONNEL, MD
        • Contact:
      • Rennes, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Rennes Beauregard
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Muriel CABOTTE CARILLON, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Virginie MIMS LAROME, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Pierre LE DOUARON, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Lisa LOUIS, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Carole PONTHUS-AUFFRET, MD
        • Contact:
      • Roquefort-les-Pins, France
        • Active, not recruiting
        • Cluster Les Collines
      • Saint-Florent-le-Vieil, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster St Florent, Mauges, Possonnière
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Jean BIMIER, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Pauline DES BOUILLONS, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Laure JANUS, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Lila TILLARD, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Julien VERRIERE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Lucile BOURLOT, MD
        • Contact:
      • Savenay, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Savenay
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Marine GARDY, MG
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Karine AH-FAT, MG
        • Contact:
      • Segré, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster SEGRE
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Héloise GISLARD, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Gilles GUSTIN, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Jérôme NUEL, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Marjorie HEBERT, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Virginie HEMERY, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Audrey LILLE, MD
        • Contact:
      • Trélazé, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Angers- Trélazé
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Sandra NETO-ANNE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Clément GUINEBERTEAU, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Carène EDIN, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Héloïse PREAU, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Marie LA TOUR GAUVRIT, MD
        • Contact:
      • Vence, France
        • Recruiting
        • Cluster Vence
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Fabrice GASPERINI, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Emilie SCALABRE, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Raphaëlle VIDAL, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Charlotte BRUN, MD
        • Contact:

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

14 years to 56 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patient consulting an investigator GP for subacute low back pain or acute recurrent low back pain
  • Patient with occupational activity (including sick leave)
  • Patient depending of occupational health service
  • Obtaining the signature of the consent to participate in this trial
  • Patient Registered with social security scheme

Non-inclusion Criteria:

  • Specific low back pain (fracture, infection, osteoporosis, inflammatory disease, tumor)
  • Low back pain with sciatic, cruralgia
  • Contraindication to active reeducation
  • Impossibility to follow up during 12 months
  • Patient planning to retire within the 12 months following the enrollment
  • Disability to write or read french
  • Adult patient protected under the law (guardianship),
  • Pregnant, breastfeeding or parturient women
  • Persons deprived of their liberty by judicial or administrative decision
  • Persons subject to legal protection measures
  • Persons unable to consent
  • Persons on coercion psychiatric care
  • Physiotherapy by a physiotherapist who don't participate in this trial

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: standard care
standard care for low back pain management by general practioners (GPs). the physiotherapist and occupational health services can be solicited independently by the patient or GP.
Experimental: coordinated care

Coordinated care between general practioners, physiotherapist and occupational health services.

An intervention training will be performed before the start of the study for any care professional's to elaborate coordination tools and have an active communication.

Coordinated care between general practioners; physiotherapists and occupational health services.

Early contact with occupational health service by the general practioner and use of occupational retention tool Active physiotherapy (Individual active, intensive and regular rehabilitation program with 15 sessions of 1 hour, at a rate of 2 or 3 sessions per week)

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Perceived inability at 1 year
Time Frame: Enrollment to 12 months follow up
Ratio of patient presenting improvement equal or above 4 points of Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. The minimum value of Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire is 0 and the maximun value is 24. A higher score mean worse outcome
Enrollment to 12 months follow up

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Perceived inability
Time Frame: Enrollment to 3 months follow up, Enrollment to 6 months follow up
Ratio of patient presenting improvement equal or above 4 points of Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. The minimum value of Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire is 0 and the maximun value is 24. A higher score mean worse outcome
Enrollment to 3 months follow up, Enrollment to 6 months follow up
Roland Morris Disability score over time
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Evolution of Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire over time. The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 24. A higher score mean worse outcome
Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Pain perceived
Time Frame: Enrollment - 3 months , Enrollment - 6 months and Enrollment -12 months
Ratio of patients presenting improvement equal or above 2 points of numerical pain scale The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 10. A higher score mean worse outcome
Enrollment - 3 months , Enrollment - 6 months and Enrollment -12 months
Numerical pain scale over time
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Evolution of numerical pain scale over time. The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 10. A higher score mean worse outcome
Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Occupational status
Time Frame: at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months
Ratio of patients having an active occupation (defined by have an employment and be present at work )
at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months
Employment rate
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Evolution of employment rate over time
Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Sick leave
Time Frame: during 12 months after inclusion
number of sick leave days
during 12 months after inclusion
Improved patients
Time Frame: at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months
Ratio of improved patients. Improved patients is defined by patient presenting improvement equal or above 4 points of Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and improvement equal or above 2 points of numerical pain scale and having a active occupational
at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months
Evolution of improved patients ratio
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Evolution of improved patients ratio over time Improved patients is defined by patient presenting improvement equal or above 4 points of Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and improvement equal or above 2 points of numerical pain scale and having a active occupational
Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Mental component score of Short Form -12
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Evolution of mental scores over time The mental component score is determined by 4 categories of Short Form -12. The minimum value of each category is 0 and the maximun value is 100. A higher score mean better outcome
Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Physical component score of Short Form -12
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Evolution of physical scores over time. The physical component score is determined by 4 categories of Short Form -12. The minimum value of each category is 0 and the maximun value is 100. A higher score mean better outcome
Enrollment, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Occupational component score of Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 12 months

Evolution of occupational component score over time. Occupational component is assessed using the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire.

The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 42. A higher score mean worse outcome

Enrollment, 3 months, 12 months
Physical activity component score of Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 12 months

Evolution of physical activity component score over time. Physical activity component is assessed using the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire.

The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 24. A higher score mean worse outcome

Enrollment, 3 months, 12 months
Anxiety component score of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Time Frame: Enrollment 3 months, 12 months
Evolution of Anxiety score over time Anxiety Component is assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 21. A higher score mean worse outcome
Enrollment 3 months, 12 months
Depression component score of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 12 months
Evolution of Depression score over time Depression component is assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 21. A higher score mean worse outcome
Enrollment, 3 months, 12 months
Coordination care score of Patient Centered Coordination by a Care Team questionnaire
Time Frame: Enrollment, 3 months, 12 months

Evolution of coordination care score over time This score is assessed by using Patient Centered Coordination by a Care Team questionnaire.

The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 42. A higher score mean better outcome

Enrollment, 3 months, 12 months
GP satisfaction related to patient care
Time Frame: T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Evolution of GP satisfaction using an numerical scale The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 10. A higher score mean worse outcome
T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Physiotherapist satisfaction related to patient care
Time Frame: T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Evolution of physiotherapist satisfaction using an numerical scale The minimum value is 0 and the maximun value is 10. A higher score mean worse outcome
T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Professionals trained for intervention
Time Frame: Baseline intervention formations
number of professionals trained for intervention
Baseline intervention formations
Biomechanical component score of Pain Attitudes and Beliefs score - for intervention physiotherapists
Time Frame: T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Evolution of Biomechanical component score for intervention physiotherapists. Biomechanical component is assessed using the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Score. The minimum value is 10 and the maximun value is 60. A higher score mean worse outcome
T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Biopsychosocial component score of Pain Attitudes and Beliefs score - for intervention physiotherapists
Time Frame: T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Evolution of Biopsychosocial component score for intervention physiotherapists. Biopsychosocial component is assessed using the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Score.The minimum value is 9 and the maximun value is 54. A higher score mean better outcome
T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Biopsychosocial component score of Pain Attitudes and Beliefs score - for GPs
Time Frame: T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Evolution of Biopsychosocial component score for GPs. Biopsychosocial component is assessed using the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Score.The minimum value is 9 and the maximun value is 54. A higher score mean better outcome
T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Biomechanical component score of Pain Attitudes and Beliefs score - for GPs
Time Frame: T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Evolution of Biomechanical component score for GPs. Biomechanical component is assessed using the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Score. The minimum value is 10 and the maximun value is 60. A higher score mean worse outcome
T0 = baseline (cluster initiation); T1 = 1 year (6 months after inclusion of the 5th cluster patient); T2 = through study completion, an average of 3 years (12 months after the last cluster patient inclusion)
Professional dialogues
Time Frame: during the 12 months of follow up
Existence and types of dialogues between GP and other professionals
during the 12 months of follow up
Number of consultations or sessions
Time Frame: during the 12 months of follow up
Number of consultations or sessions
during the 12 months of follow up

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Aline RAMOND ROQUIN, MD-PHD, Department of Family Medicine - University of Angers

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

September 21, 2022

Primary Completion (Estimated)

October 31, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

November 25, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

March 3, 2021

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 29, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

April 1, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

September 19, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 15, 2025

Last Verified

September 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 2020-A01039-30

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

Data will be shared upon reasonable request. Only de-identified data will be shared. Any data collected during the study may be shared. The protocol will be shared initially. Other documents may be shared at a later date upon request (e.g., the CRF to allow a collaborator to select the data they wish to access). The recipients of the data will be researchers. The data will be available for any purpose deemed relevant by the study investigator, based on a protocol provided by the requester, after verification of the obtaining of regulatory approvals, including the favorable opinion of an ethics committee.

IPD Sharing Time Frame

The data will be shared after signing a negotiated data transfer agreement ( data access agreement), for the duration specified in the agreement.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

The data will be made available via secure transfer (sharing platform approved by the university hospital: BlueFiles or Oodrive).

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • STUDY_PROTOCOL

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Low Back Pain

Clinical Trials on Coordinated care

Subscribe