Regulatory Contexts Affecting Work Reintegration of People with Chronic Disease and Disabilities

Lippel, Katherine

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-75381-2_18-1

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, their participants noted that the policies of workers' compensation boards (including payment model, length of treatment, minimum treatment sessions per week) often limited the quality of services offered to injured workers. This impact has also been documented in other industrialized countries [18,41,42]. According to our ndings, a lack of support from workplaces due to the perceived added burden of reintegrating W55 + may also limit the adaptability of these workplaces.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Rehabilitating workers aged 55 and over: professionals’ perspectives and solutions

Durand,

Coutu,

Lecours

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Work disability affects a growing number of workers aged 55 and over (W55+). While rehabilitation programs have demonstrated efficacy for workers with an average age of 42, they often have not been designed to meet unique needs of aging workers. This study aimed to describe the difficulties encountered by work rehabilitation professionals and explore their solutions for improving services offered to W55+. Methods This study used a simple descriptive design with purposive sampling. Occupational therapists, physical therapists, and psychologists were mainly recruited in private clinics. An interview guide based on the Work Disability Paradigm, was pretested and used with the participants. Qualitative interviews were conducted with work rehabilitation professionals and then transcribed. A thematic analysis was performed. Results The sample consisted of fourteen (15) participants (average age 38 years) with near equal representation across genders and disciplines. Difficulties were identified in relation to the (1) characteristics of W55+, (2) work environment, (3) compensation system, and (4) communication among stakeholders. Five solutions were proposed to improve the services offered: provide healthcare professionals with access to tools and training, implement communication mechanisms, integrate a return-to-work coordinator, develop a joint action plan for managing W55+, and implement an integrative prevention approach in workplaces. Conclusions Our results represent a first step in mapping various stakeholders’ needs to ensure better support for W55 + with work disabilities. These results delineate a roadmap for future research that should expand upon these stakeholders’ perspectives to provide a more comprehensive description of their needs and potential solutions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Rehabilitating workers aged 55 and over: professionals’ perspectives and solutions

Durand,

Coutu,

Lecours

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research on return-to-work outcomes has primarily focused on interventions aimed at reducing time off work and re-integrating persons with disabilities into the workforce (e.g. Lippel, 2020). We further propose that return-to-work outcomes encompass attitudinal outcomes, including managerial perceptions of employees with disabilities when they return to work.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Employee disability disclosure and managerial prejudices in the return-to-work context

Lyubykh

Turner

Barling

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper investigates the extent to which disability type contributes to differential evaluation of employees by managers. In particular, the authors examined managerial prejudice against 3 disability diagnoses (i.e. psychiatric, physical disability and pending diagnosis) compared to a control group in a return-to-work scenario.Design/methodology/approachWorking managers (N = 238) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 scenarios containing medical documentation for a fictional employee that disclosed either the employee's psychiatric disability, physical disability, or a pending diagnosis. The authors also collected a separate sample (N = 42) as a control group that received a version of the medical documentation but contained no information about the disability diagnosis.FindingsCompared with employees without stated disabilities, employees with a psychiatric disability were evaluated as more aggressive toward other employees, less trustworthy and less committed to the organization. Compared to employees with either physical disabilities or pending diagnoses, employees with psychiatric disabilities were rated as less committed to the organization. The authors discuss implications for future research and the trade-offs inherent in disability labeling and disclosure.Originality/valueThe current study extends prior research by examining a broader range of outcomes (i.e. perceived aggressiveness, trustworthiness and commitment) and moving beyond performance evaluations of employees with disabilities. The authors also assess the relative status of a “pending diagnosis” category—a type of disclosure often encountered by managers in many jurisdictions as part of accommodating employees returning to work from medical-related absence.

show abstract

Regulatory Contexts Affecting Work Reintegration of People with Chronic Disease and Disabilities

Cited by 2 publications

References 46 publications

Rehabilitating workers aged 55 and over: professionals’ perspectives and solutions

Rehabilitating workers aged 55 and over: professionals’ perspectives and solutions

Employee disability disclosure and managerial prejudices in the return-to-work context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About