Effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation on work participation in adults with musculoskeletal disorders: an umbrella review protocol

Abstract

Section 6 of the "Repository policy for OpenAIR @ RGU" (available from http://www.rgu.ac.uk/staff-and-currentstudents/library/library-policies/repository-policies) provides guidance on the criteria under which RGU will consider withdrawing material from OpenAIR. If you believe that this item is subject to any of these criteria, or for any other reason should not be held on OpenAIR, then please contact openair-help@rgu.ac.uk with the details of the item and the nature of your complaint.

Effectiveness of interventions for improving livelihood outcomes for people with disabilities in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review

“…There is a broader existing pool of reviews which focus on specific aspects of the central question of which interventions are effective at improving livelihood outcomes for people with disabilities. These reviews are restricted in terms of: Impairment type/condition included : Several reviews have been undertaken, or are planned, which focus on livelihood outcomes for people with specific impairments or conditions, including people with musculoskeletal conditions (Alexander et al, 2017; Seeberg et al, 2019), Autism, (Westbrook et al, 2013) acquired brain injury (Batavia et al, 2017), Stroke (Chan et al, 2013) or mental health conditions (Suijkerbuijk et al, 2017). However, reviews are lacking addressing disability holistically. Eligible livelihood outcomes : Reviews have been undertaken or are planned that focus only on restricted outcomes related to livelihood.…”

PROTOCOL: Effectiveness of interventions for improving livelihood outcomes for people with disabilities in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review

“…However, reviews are lacking addressing disability holistically. Eligible livelihood outcomes: Reviews have been undertaken or are planned that focus only on restricted outcomes related to livelihood. As an example, Gensby et al (2012) addressed the effectiveness of workplace‐based disability management programs for promoting return‐to‐work outcomes, while Alexander et al (2017) focussed on work participation. Banks, Mearkle, et al (2017) considered studies on what is effective to improve inclusion and outcomes for people with disabilities.…”

“…These reviews are restricted in terms of: Impairment type/condition included: Several reviews have been undertaken, or are planned, which focus on livelihood outcomes for people with specific impairments or conditions. Many of these addressed only employment among people with musculoskeletal conditions (Alexander et al, 2017; Sundstrup et al, 2018). Reviews also exist or are planned that focus on other conditions or impairment types, such as people with autism (Westbrook et al, 2013), acquired brain injury (Batavia et al, 2017), stroke (Chan et al, 2013) or mental health conditions (Suijkerbuijk et al, 2017).…”

“…Another concern with existing reviews is that many are still at the protocol phase and have not yet been published (e.g., Alexander et al 2017; Sundstrup et al, 2018). Furthermore, most existing reviews have either identified no eligible studies (e.g., Westbrook et al, 2013), or only studies from high income settings (e.g., Gensby et al, 2012, or Arif, 2018).…”

The effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation on work participation: a propensity score matched analysis using nationwide register data

“…Several recent reviews have focused on interventions aiming to promote work participation among individuals with ill-health (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8). Among the various interventions, vocational rehabilitation services have been associated with favorable outcomes (5,(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16).…”