Background: Working with a chronic condition can be challenging. Providing support to workers with a chronic condition can help them to stay at work and prevent work-related problems. Workers with a chronic condition who successfully stay at work can provide valuable input for the development of effective supportive interventions to prevent exit from work and facilitate sustainable employment. The aim of this study is to explore the lived experiences of workers with a chronic condition and identify existing barriers, facilitators and possible support needs for staying at work. Methods: Four focus groups were conducted between August and December 2017 with workers with one or more chronic conditions (n = 30). Participants included employees and (partially) self-employed workers. All focus group data were transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed. Results: Disclosure and expressing one's needs were considered important personal facilitators for staying at work. Environmental facilitators included receiving practical information on working with a chronic condition and social and employer support. Environmental barriers were identified in the work environment, the health care system and service provision, e.g., manager and co-worker's lack of knowledge about working with a chronic condition, a lack of focus on work in the course of treatment for a chronic condition, dissatisfaction with occupational physician support, and the absence of support for self-employed workers. Provided support should be available to all workers, and be proactive and tailored to the workers' specific support needs. Conclusions: A variety of facilitators, barriers and support needs were identified in various domains. By addressing environmental barriers (e.g., by integrating work in the course of treatment and creating supportive work environments), sustainable employment by workers with a chronic condition can be promoted.

Purpose Health problems among employees with a lower socioeconomic position (SEP) often result from an interplay of problems on multiple life domains. Contextual factors greatly affect implementation of interventions that aim to solve these type of problems. The aim of this study was to gain insight into the organizational and socio-political context for implementation of preventive interventions that consider multiple life domains among employees with a lower SEP. Methods In total 16 semi-structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders at organizational level, occupational health service (OHS) level, and at socio-political macro level. Thematic analysis was performed to identify themes that describe the perceptions of stakeholders about the impact of contextual factors on implementation. Results The following themes were identified: (1) the importance of addressing problems on multiple life domains among employees with a lower SEP, (2) unclarity of responsibilities for solving problems on multiple life domains, (3) necessity of better collaboration between occupational and curative healthcare, (4) insufficient investments in prevention by employers, (5) difficulties in early identification of employees at risk for health problems, and (6) risk of conflicting role for supervisors in addressing problems on multiple life domains. Conclusions Implementation of preventive interventions considering multiple life domains among lower SEP employees is challenging, due to various contextual factors. To improve the feasibility, many different stakeholders both in- and outside occupational health practice need to be involved, collaborate, and need to be convinced of the added value to prevent problems on multiple life domains among employees with a lower SEP.

Purpose This study describes the development of an evidence-based intervention to create a supportive work environment for employees with chronic conditions. Occupational physicians (OPs) play an important role in guiding organizations in this process of organizational change. Supportive work environments can aid in preventing work-related problems and facilitate sustainable employment. Current workplace interventions for employees with chronic conditions are mainly focused on return to work or a reduction in sick leave at the individual worker’s level. This study contributes to the literature an organizational-level intervention which utilizes a preventive approach. Methods Intervention mapping (IM) is a six-step, structured protocol that was used to develop this intervention. In step 1, a needs assessment was conducted to define the problem and explore the perspectives of all stakeholders involved. The program outcomes and the performance objectives of employees with chronic conditions and occupational physicians were specified in step 2. In step 3, appropriate methods and practical applications were chosen. Step 4 describes the actual development of the intervention, consisting of (1) a training for occupational physicians to teach them how to guide organizations in creating a supportive work environment; (2) a practical assignment; and (3) a follow-up meeting. The intervention will be implemented in a pilot study in which occupational physicians will put their acquired knowledge and skills into practice within one of their organizations, which is delineated in step 5. Conclusions IM proved to be a valuable and practical tool for the development of this intervention, aiming to facilitate sustainable employment for employees with chronic conditions.

Genetic testing for maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) may be relevant for treatment and prognosis in patients with usually early-onset, non-ketotic, insulin-sensitive diabetes and for monitoring strategies in non-diabetic mutation carriers. This study describes the first 10 years of genetic testing for MODY in The Netherlands in terms of volume and test positive rate, medical setting, purpose of the test and age of patients tested. Some analyses focus on the most prevalent subtype, HNF1A MODY. Data were retrospectively extracted from a laboratory database. In total, 502 individuals were identified with a pathogenic mutation in HNF4A, GCK or HNF1A between 2001 and 2010. Although mutation scanning for MODY was used at an increasing rate, cascade testing was only used for one relative, on average, per positive index patient. Testing for HNF1A MODY was mostly requested by internists and paediatricians, often from regional hospitals. Primary care physicians and clinical geneticists rarely requested genetic testing for HNF1A MODY. Clinical geneticists requested cascade testing relatively more often than other health professionals. A substantial proportion (currently 29%) of HNF1A MODY probands was at least 40 years old at the time of testing. In conclusion, the number of individuals genetically tested for MODY so far in The Netherlands is low compared with previously predicted numbers of patients. Doctors' valuation of the test and patients' and family members' response to (an offer of) genetic testing on the other hand need to be investigated. Efforts may be needed to develop and implement translational guidelines.