How Well Do Return-to-work Interventions for Musculoskeletal Conditions Address the Multicausality of Work Disability?

Briand, Catherine; Durand, Marie-José; St-Arnaud, Louise; Corbière, Marc

doi:10.1007/s10926-008-9128-1

Cited by 49 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These have ranged from minimal postal intervention, OH phone intervention to multidisciplinary approaches involving workplace assessment, work modifications and importantly case management involving all stakeholders (22)(23)(24)(25). However, to our knowledge there are far fewer studies or reviews of very early intervention under two weeks (26,27), despite the fact that there are a number of commercially successful companies offering sickness absence management services to employers, which involve the employee being telephoned on day one (28,29).…”

Section: Brown Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Demou et al (34) have described the rationale and implementation of the EASY service in NHSL. In brief, this new telephonebased sickness absence management service provides early intervention based on the biopsychosocial model (35) applying cognitive behavioral principles, and utilizing evidence-based interventions (16,(22)(23)(24)36). A brief description of the process follows.…”

Section: Brown Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The EASY (Early Access to Support for You) sickness absence service: a four-year evaluation of the impact on absenteeism

Brown¹,

Mackay²,

Demou³

et al. 2015

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Brown Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Brown Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

The EASY (Early Access to Support for You) sickness absence service: a four-year evaluation of the impact on absenteeism

Brown¹,

Mackay²,

Demou³

et al. 2015

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A review of workplace interventions has shown that the interventions are more focused on changing and improving the individual's prerequisites for return to work than making changes in work environment and organisation [35]. The most common workplace interventions are directed towards stress management, retraining in work tasks, and accommodations made at the workplace to help the worker adjust to the work task requirements [36]. In addition, a comparative study, investigating if cross country differences could explain differences in return to work after occupational back pain, showed that Sweden was one of the countries that did not use workplace interventions to any extent for promoting the return-to-work process [37].…”

Section: The Roles and Responsibilities Of Supervisors And Co-workersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The social interaction of return to work explored from co-workers experiences

Tjulin¹,

MacEachen²,

Stiwne³

et al. 2011

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The objective was to explore the role and contribution of co-workers in the return-to-work process. The social interaction of co-workers in the return to work process are analysed within the framework of the Swedish national and local employer organisational return-to-work policies.Methods An exploratory qualitative method was used, consisting of open-ended interviews with 33 workplace actors across seven work units. Organisational return-towork policies were collected from the three public sector employers. ResultsThe key findings that emerged during analysis showed that some co-workers have a more work-task oriented approach towards the return-to-work process, whilst others had a more social relational approach. In both situations the social relations worked hand in hand with job tasks (how task were allocated, and how returning workers were supported by others) and could make or break the return-to-work process.Conclusion A suggestion for improvement of return-to-work models and policies is the need to take into account the social relations amongst workplace actors, especially involving co-workers when planning for return-to-work interventions. Otherwise the proper attention to work arrangements, social communication and the role if co-workers in the return-to-work process might not be seen.

show abstract

“…The worker/patient, the employer, the healthcare provider, and the insurer, are all involved in the work disability process, often in complex interplays [7][8][9][10]. Also, the process of return to work (RTW) following ill health has a multifactorial nature, including complex interactions between (1) biological, psychological, and social factors as well as (2) different ''systems'', such as the personal, workplace, health care and insurance system [7,9,[11][12][13]. Moreover, work disability and RTW processes and practices have to be understood and appreciated within the specific administrative and jurisdictional context [7,11,14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coordinated and Tailored Work Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial with Economic Evaluation Undertaken with Workers on Sick Leave Due to Musculoskeletal Disorders

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction In Denmark, the magnitude and impact of work disability on the individual worker and society has prompted the development of a new ''coordinated and tailored work rehabilitation'' (CTWR) approach. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of CTWR with conventional case management (CCM) on return-towork of workers on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). Methods The study was a randomized controlled trial with economic evaluation undertaken with workers on sick leave for 4-12 weeks due to MSDs. CTWR consists of a work disability screening by an interdisciplinary team followed by the collaborative development of a RTW plan. The primary outcome variable was registered cumulative sickness absence hours during 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes were work status as well as pain intensity and functional disability, measured at baseline, 3 and 12 months follow-up. The economic evaluation (intervention costs, productivity loss, and health care utilization costs) was based on administrative data derived from national registries. Results For the time intervals 0-6 months, 6-12 months, and the entire follow-up period, the number of sickness absence hours was significantly lower in the CTWR group as compared to the control group. The total costs saved in CTWR participants compared to controls were estimated at US $ 1,366 per person at 6 months follow-up and US $ 10,666 per person at 12 months follow-up. Conclusions Workers on sick leave for 4-12 weeks due to MSD who underwent ''CTWR'' by an interdisciplinary team had fewer sickness absence hours than controls. The economic evaluation showed that-in terms of productivity loss-CTWR seems to be cost saving for the society.

show abstract

How Well Do Return-to-work Interventions for Musculoskeletal Conditions Address the Multicausality of Work Disability?

Cited by 49 publications

References 28 publications

The EASY (Early Access to Support for You) sickness absence service: a four-year evaluation of the impact on absenteeism

The EASY (Early Access to Support for You) sickness absence service: a four-year evaluation of the impact on absenteeism

The social interaction of return to work explored from co-workers experiences

Coordinated and Tailored Work Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial with Economic Evaluation Undertaken with Workers on Sick Leave Due to Musculoskeletal Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About