BackgroundPrevious validation studies of sick leave measures have focused on self-reports. Register-based sick leave data are considered to be valid; however methodological problems may be associated with such data. A Danish national register on sickness benefit (DREAM) has been widely used in sick leave research. On the basis of sick leave records from 3,554 and 2,311 eldercare workers in 14 different workplaces, the aim of this study was to: 1) validate registered sickness benefit data from DREAM against workplace-registered sick leave spells of at least 15 days; 2) validate self-reported sick leave days during one year against workplace-registered sick leave.MethodsAgreement between workplace-registered sick leave and DREAM-registered sickness benefit was reported as sensitivities, specificities and positive predictive values. A receiver-operating characteristic curve and a Bland-Altman plot were used to study the concordance with sick leave duration of the first spell. By means of an analysis of agreement between self-reported and workplace-registered sick leave sensitivity and specificity was calculated. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals (95% CI) were used.ResultsThe probability that registered DREAM data on sickness benefit agrees with workplace-registered sick leave of at least 15 days was 96.7% (95% CI: 95.6-97.6). Specificity was close to 100% (95% CI: 98.3-100). The registered DREAM data on sickness benefit overestimated the duration of sick leave spells by an average of 1.4 (SD: 3.9) weeks. Separate analysis on pregnancy-related sick leave revealed a maximum sensitivity of 20% (95% CI: 4.3-48.1).The sensitivity of self-reporting at least one or at least 56 sick leave day/s was 94.5 (95% CI: 93.4 – 95.5) % and 58.5 (95% CI: 51.1 – 65.6) % respectively. The corresponding specificities were 85.3 (95% CI: 81.4 – 88.6) % and 98.9 (95% CI: 98.3 – 99.3) %.ConclusionsThe DREAM register offered valid measures of sick leave spells of at least 15 days among eldercare employees. Pregnancy-related sick leave should be excluded in studies planning to use DREAM data on sickness benefit. Self-reported sick leave became more imprecise when number of absence days increased, but the sensitivity and specificity were acceptable for lengths not exceeding one week.

BackgroundReferral rates of general practitioners (GPs) are an important determinant of secondary care utilization. The variation in these rates across GPs is considerable, and cannot be explained by patient morbidity alone. The main objective of this study was to assess the GPs’ referral rate to secondary care in Norway, any associations between the referral decision and patient, GP, health care characteristics and who initiated the referring issue in the consultation.MethodsThe probabilities of referral to secondary care and/or radiological examination were examined in 100 consecutive consultations of 44 randomly chosen Norwegian GPs. The GPs recorded whether the issue of referral was introduced, who introduced it and if the patient was referred. Multilevel and naive multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to explore associations between the probability of referral and patient, GP and health care characteristics.ResultsOf the 4350 consultations included, 13.7% (GP range 4.0%-28.0%) of patients were referred to secondary somatic and psychiatric care. Female GPs referred significantly more frequently than male GPs (16.0% versus 12.6%, adjusted odds ratio, AOR, 1.25), specialists in family medicine less frequently than their counterparts (12.5% versus 14.9%, AOR 0.76) and salaried GPs more frequently than private practitioners (16.2% versus 12.1%, AOR 1.36).In 4.2% (GP range 0%-12.9%) of the consultations, patients were referred to radiological examination. Specialists in family medicine, salaried GPs and GPs with a Norwegian medical degree referred significantly more frequently to radiological examination than their counterparts (AOR 1.93, 2.00 and 1.73, respectively).The issue of referral was introduced in 23% of the consultations, and in 70.6% of these cases by the GP. The high referrers introduced the referral issue significantly more frequently and also referred a significantly larger proportion when the issue was introduced.ConclusionsThe main finding of the present study was a high overall referral rate, and a striking range among the GPs. Male GPs and specialists in family medicine referred significantly less frequently to secondary care, but the latter referred more frequently to radiological examination. Our findings indicate that intervention on high referrers is a potential area for quality improvement, and there is a need to explore the referral decision process itself.

BackgroundThere is a large variation in referral rates to secondary care among GPs, which is partly unexplained.AimTo explore associations between reasons for referral to secondary care and patient, GP, and healthcare characteristics.Design and settingA cross-sectional study in Northern Norway.MethodData were derived from 44 (42%) of 104 randomly selected GPs between 2008 and 2010. GPs scored the relevance of nine predefined reasons for 595 referrals from 4350 consecutive consultations on a four-level categorical scale. Associations were examined by multivariable ordered and multivariable multilevel logistic regression analyses.ResultsMedical necessity was assessed as a relevant reason in 93% of the referrals, 43.7% by patient preference, 27.5% to avoid overlooking anything, and 14.6% to reassure the patient. The higher the referral rates, the more frequently the GPs referred to avoid overlooking anything. Female GPs referred to reassure the patient and due to perceived deficient medical knowledge significantly more often than male GPs. However, perceived easy accessibility of specialists was significantly less frequently given as a reason for referral by female GPs compared with male GPs. When the GPs scored the referrals to be of lesser medical necessity, male GPs referred significantly more frequently than female GPs to reassure the patient due to patient preference and perceived deficient medical knowledge.ConclusionThere are striking differences in reasons for referral between Norwegian male and female GPs and between GPs with high and low referral rates, which reflects difficulties in handling professional uncertainty. Referring to reassure the patients, especially when referrals are less medically necessary, may reflect consideration and acquiescence towards the patients.

Three to four weeks of inpatient occupational rehabilitation is mainstream in Scandinavia, but the effects have not been investigated. This is the first study to show that, among individuals on long-term sickness absence due to musculoskeletal-or common mental disorders, 3.5 weeks of inpatient multimodal occupational rehabilitation significantly reduced sickness absence compared with 6 weekly sessions of outpatient acceptance and commitment therapy.

Background: The lack of efficient medical interventions for combating increasing sickness absence rates has lead to the introduction of alternative measures initiated by the Norwegian National Insurance Service or at workplaces. Aim: To determine whether minimal postal intervention had any effect on the length of sick leave. Methods: Randomised, controlled trial with a one year follow up in Northern Norway in 1997 and 1998; 990 consecutive newly sick-listed persons with musculoskeletal or mental disorders were studied. Within the intervention group, 495 eligible sick-listed persons received a general information letter and a questionnaire as their sick leave passed 14 days. Possible intervention effects were analysed by survival analysis of the probability of returning to work within one year, and logistic regressions with benefits at one year as the dependent variable. Results: The overall reduction of 8.3 (95% CI 222.5 to 6.0) calendar days in mean length of sick leaves in the intervention group compared to controls, was not statistically significant. However, intervention significantly reduced length of sick leaves in subgroups with mental disorders, and with rheumatic disorders and arthritis, and overall for sick leaves lasting 12 weeks or more. Young people with low back pain showed an adverse effect to intervention. The overall relative risk of receiving benefits due to sickness after one year in the intervention group was 0.69 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.93) compared to controls. Conclusion:The results should encourage employers, insurance institutions, and authorities to initiate challenges as questions on the length of sick leave and possible modified work measures, during the first few weeks of sick leave, for at least some groups of sick-listed persons.

Purpose To assess effects of an inpatient multicomponent occupational rehabilitation program compared to less comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation on sickness absence in persons with musculoskeletal- or mental health disorders. Methods Randomized clinical trial with parallel groups. Participants were individuals 18–60 years old on sick-leave for 2–12 months with a sick-leave diagnosis within the musculoskeletal, psychological or general and unspecified chapters of ICPC-2, identified in a national register. The inpatient program (4 + 4 days) consisted of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), physical training and work-related problem-solving including creating a return to work plan and a workplace visit if considered relevant. The outpatient program consisted primarily of ACT (6 sessions during 6 weeks). Both programs were group based. Primary outcome was cumulated number of sickness absence days at 6 and 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcome was time until sustainable return to work. Results 168 individuals were randomized to the inpatient program (n = 92) or the outpatient program (n = 76). We found no statistically significant difference between the programs in median number of sickness absence days at 6 and 12 months follow-up. In the outpatient program 57% of the participants achieved sustainable return to work (median time 7 months), in the inpatient program 49% (log rank, p = 0.167). The hazard ratio for sustainable return to work was 0.74 (95% CI 0.48–1.32, p = 0.165), in favor of the outpatient program. Conclusions This study provided no support that the more comprehensive 4 + 4 days inpatient multicomponent occupational rehabilitation program reduced sickness absence compared to the outpatient rehabilitation program.

BackgroundSickness absence is a growing public health problem in Norway and Denmark, with the highest absence rates being registered in Norway. We compared time trends in sickness absence patterns of municipal employees in the health and care sectors in Norway and Denmark.MethodsData from 2004 to 2008 were extracted from the personnel registers of the municipalities of Kristiansand, Norway, and Aarhus, Denmark, for 3,181 and 8,545 female employees, respectively. Age-specific comparative statistics on sickness absence rates (number of calendar days of sickness absence/possible working days) and number of sick leave episodes were calculated for each year of the study period.ResultsThere was an overall increasing trend in sickness absence rates in Denmark (P = 0.002), where rates were highest in the 20–29- (P = 0.01) and 50–59-year-old age groups (P = 0.03). Sickness absence rates in Norway were stable, except for an increase in the 20–29-year-old age group (P = 0.004). In both Norway and Denmark, the mean number of sick leave episodes increased (P <0.0001 and P <0.0001, respectively) in all age groups except for the 30–39- and 60–67-year-old age groups. The proportion of employees without sickness absence was higher in Norway than in Denmark. Both short-term and long-term absence increased in Denmark (P = 0.003 and P <0.0001, respectively), while in Norway, only short-term absence increased (P = 0.09).ConclusionsWe found an overall increase in sickness absence rates in Denmark, while the largest overall increase in sick leave episodes was found in Norway. In both countries, the largest increases were observed among young employees. The results indicate that the two countries are converging in regard to sickness absence measured as rates and episodes.

Background: The knowledge of factors accurately predicting the long lasting sick leaves is sparse, but information on medical condition is believed to be necessary to identify persons at risk. Based on the current practice, with identifying sick-listed individuals at risk of long-lasting sick leaves, the objectives of this study were to inquire the diagnostic accuracy of length of sick leaves predicted in the Norwegian National Insurance Offices, and to compare their predictions with the selfpredictions of the sick-listed.