Enhancing the vocational outcomes of people with chronic disabilities caused by a musculoskeletal condition: Development and evaluation of content of self-management training modules

Johnston, Venerina; Strong, Jenny; Gargett, Susan; Jull, Gwendolen; Ellis, Niki

doi:10.3233/wor-131722

Cited by 6 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Good inter-personal collaboration between the stakeholders (i.e., all professionals included in the RTW process) was seen as positive [18,[22][23][24]27,[30][31][32][33] and confirmed that the rehabilitation process was regularly supervised and therefore fostered a quicker RTW [18,[22][23][24]27,32]. More contact with professionals was also seen as a way to successfully influence the RTW process [19,22,24,27,28,31].…”

Section: Participating Professionals' Approachmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…Cultural values concerning disability and a work role [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] Ongoing societal changes/development [20,25,28,29] Inadequate work place policy/guidelines [27,30] Participating professionals' approach Relationship between employer and employee [18,[20][21][22][23][24]27,[31][32][33] Collaboration between professionals [18,[22][23][24]27,[30][31][32][33] Contact in a higher degree with diverse professionals [18,21,22,[32][33][34] Encounters [18,21,22,32,33] Information/knowledge [18,20,23,…”

Section: Societal Structures Influencing Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In several studies [18,[20][21][22][23][24]27,[31][32][33], the relationships between the employer and the employee were seen as a facilitator or a barrier in RTW. Employers stated that it was helpful to trust employees, and maintaining contact with absent employees was valuable [22,23,33].…”

Section: Participating Professionals' Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More contact with professionals was also seen as a way to successfully influence the RTW process [19,22,24,27,28,31]. In addition, positive encounters (e.g., during meetings) that considered a person's situation seriously, reflecting trust in the person's judgment and respect for their views regarding their pain, were also considered facilitators for RTW and SAW [18,21,22,32,33]. Additionally, transfer of information/knowledge between health professionals and stakeholders in general was emphasized [18,20,23,27,32].…”

Section: Participating Professionals' Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, positive encounters (e.g., during meetings) that considered a person's situation seriously, reflecting trust in the person's judgment and respect for their views regarding their pain, were also considered facilitators for RTW and SAW [18,21,22,32,33]. Additionally, transfer of information/knowledge between health professionals and stakeholders in general was emphasized [18,20,23,27,32]. For example, an external exchange of documentation as well as the agreement in reaching goals towards RTW were seen as facilitators for successful RTW [27,31].…”

Section: Participating Professionals' Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Qualitative Evidence from Studies of Interventions Aimed at Return to Work and Staying at Work for Persons with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain

Liedberg

Björk

Dragioti

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic musculoskeletal pain is a significant burden for employees, employers, and society. However, more knowledge is needed about which interventions reduce sick leave. Interventions were defined as the act or an instance of intervening, provided by different stakeholders. This review synthesizes the experiences of patients, employers, and health professionals concerning the interventions that influence returning to work and staying at work for persons with chronic musculoskeletal pain. A literature search was performed using several combinations of key terms. Overall, 18 qualitative studies published between 2002 and 2018 were included. Qualitative analysis assessed how much confidence could be placed in each review finding. Moderate evidence was found for factors improving the return to work process such as collaboration between stakeholders, including the persons with chronic musculoskeletal pain and support from all involved actors in the process. Moderate evidence was found for self-management strategies and workplace adjustments needed to facilitate more persons to returning to work and staying at work despite pain. This review provides stakeholders, employers, and health professionals’ information that could be used to develop and implement interventions to increase the possibilities for persons with chronic musculoskeletal pain returning to work or staying at work

show abstract

Section: Participating Professionals' Approachmentioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Societal Structures Influencing Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participating Professionals' Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participating Professionals' Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participating Professionals' Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Qualitative Evidence from Studies of Interventions Aimed at Return to Work and Staying at Work for Persons with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain

Liedberg

Björk

Dragioti

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Implementing a Self-Management Intervention for People with a Chronic Compensable Musculoskeletal Injury in a Workers Compensation Context: A Process Evaluation

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the difficulties encountered, high stakeholder acceptability suggests that the concept and theory underlying the targeted SM intervention were not flawed, though there is room for further tailoring to both the program method and its timing. The results of this process evaluation provide a useful platform for others considering the implementation of interventions within the vocational rehabilitation context or with individuals with chronic, compensated injuries.

show abstract

What guides back pain care? A content analysis of low back pain directives in the Australian context

Parambath

Costa

Schneider

et al. 2023

Health Res Policy Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Low back pain (LBP) is a major cause of disease burden around the world. There is known clinical variation in how LBP is treated and addressed; with one cited reason the lack of availability, or use of, evidence-based guidance for clinicians, consumers, and administrators. Despite this a considerable number of policy directives such as clinical practice guidelines, models of care and clinical tools with the aim of improving quality of LBP care do exist. Here we report on the development of a repository of LBP directives developed in the Australian health system and a content analysis of those directives aimed at deepening our understanding of the guidance landscape. Specifically, we sought to determine: (1) What is the type, scale, and scope of LBP directives available? (2) Who are the key stakeholders that drive low back pain care through directives? (3) What content do they cover? (4) What are their gaps and deficiencies? Methods We used online web search and snowballing methods to collate a repository of LBP policy documents collectively called 'directives' including Models of Care (MOC), information sheets, clinical tools, guidelines, surveys, and reports, from the last 20 years. The texts of the directives were analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis adopting methods from descriptive policy content analysis to categorise and analyse content to determine origins, actors, and themes. Results Eighty-four directives were included in our analysis. Of those, 55 were information sheets aimed at either healthcare providers or patients, nine were clinical tools, three were reports, four were guidelines, four were MOC, two were questionnaires and five were referral forms/criteria. The three main categories of content found in the directives were 1. Low back pain features 2. Standards for clinical encounters and 3. Management of LBP, each of which gave rise to different themes and subthemes. Universities, not-for-profit organizations, government organisations, hospitals/Local Health Districts, professional organisations, consumers, and health care insurers were all involved in the production of policy directives. However, there were no clear patterns of roles, responsibilities or authority between these stakeholder groups. Conclusion Directives have the potential to inform practice and to contribute to reducing evidence-policy-practice discordance. Documents in our repository demonstrate that while a range of directives exist across Australia, but the evidence base for many was not apparent. Qualitative content analysis of the directives showed that while there has been increasing attention given to models of care, this is not yet reflected in directives, which generally focus on more specific elements of LBP care at the individual patient and practitioner level. The sheer number and variety of directives, from a wide range of sources and various locations within the Australian health system suggests a fragmented policy landscape without clear authoritative sources. There is a need for clearer, easily accessible trustworthy policy directives that are regularly reviewed and that meet the needs of care providers, and information websites need to be evaluated regularly for their evidence-based nature and quality.

show abstract

Enhancing the vocational outcomes of people with chronic disabilities caused by a musculoskeletal condition: Development and evaluation of content of self-management training modules

Cited by 6 publications

References 19 publications

Qualitative Evidence from Studies of Interventions Aimed at Return to Work and Staying at Work for Persons with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain

Qualitative Evidence from Studies of Interventions Aimed at Return to Work and Staying at Work for Persons with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain

Implementing a Self-Management Intervention for People with a Chronic Compensable Musculoskeletal Injury in a Workers Compensation Context: A Process Evaluation

What guides back pain care? A content analysis of low back pain directives in the Australian context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About