Workplace Disability Management Programs Promoting Return to Work: A Systematic Review

Gensby, Ulrik; Lund, Thomas; Kowalski, Krystyna; Saidj, Madina; Jørgensen, Anne Marie Klint; Filges, Trine; Irvin, Emma; Amick, Benjamin C.; Labriola, Merete

doi:10.4073/csr.2012.17

Cited by 26 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This factor is also potentially modifiable [32–35]. Those expecting to recover more slowly after injury often do [36–38], and not expecting to RTW leads to a slower recovery [39] and a higher risk of receiving sick leave benefits [40].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWork disability is a major personal, financial and public health burden. Predicting future work success is a major focus of research.ObjectivesTo identify common prognostic factors for return-to-work across different health and injury conditions and to describe their association with return-to-work outcomes.MethodsMedline, Embase, PsychINFO, Cinahl, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the grey literature were searched from January 1, 2004 to September 1, 2013. Systematic reviews addressing return-to-work in various conditions and injuries were selected. Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria to identify low risk of bias reviews.ResultsOf the 36,193 titles screened and the 94 eligible studies reviewed, 56 systematic reviews were accepted as low risk of bias. Over half of these focused on musculoskeletal disorders, which were primarily spine related (e.g., neck and low back pain). The other half of studies assessed workers with mental health or cardiovascular conditions, stroke, cancer, multiple sclerosis or other non-specified health conditions. Many factors have been assessed, but few consistently across conditions. Common factors associated with positive return-to-work outcomes were higher education and socioeconomic status, higher self-efficacy and optimistic expectations for recovery and return-to-work, lower severity of the injury/illness, return-to-work coordination, and multidisciplinary interventions that include the workplace and stakeholders. Common factors associated with negative return-to-work outcomes were older age, being female, higher pain or disability, depression, higher physical work demands, previous sick leave and unemployment, and activity limitations.ConclusionsExpectations of recovery and return-to-work, pain and disability levels, depression, workplace factors, and access to multidisciplinary resources are important modifiable factors in progressing return-to-work across health and injury conditions. Employers, healthcare providers and other stakeholders can use this information to facilitate return-to-work for injured/ill workers regardless of the specific injury or illness. Future studies should investigate novel interventions, and other factors that may be common across health conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…DM may be defined as 'a systematic and goal-oriented approach at the workplace which aims to simplify the RTW-process for persons with occupational disabilities through coordinated efforts, taking into account individual needs, workplace conditions and the legal framework' (NIDMAR 2000). 3 The goal of DM is to create workplace systems of management policies and practices (e.g., WDPM programs) (Gensby 2012), consisting of an integrated set of components promoting safe and timely RTW and sustained job retention within the work environment. A WPDM program therefore relates to conditions of the coordination of work accommodations and practical implementation of RTW activities, and rehabilitative interventions with the agreement of the worker, labor and management, and with the support of occupational health and safety services, allied health care, insurance and service providers, and coworkers.…”

Section: Discussion and Wider Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Theoretical concept (Geisen & Harder 2011;Harder 2014) • Planned intervention/program (Gensby 2012(Gensby , 2014 • Counselling practice (Habeck 1994) • Labour relations strategy (Jodoin & Harder 2004) As a theoretical construct, DM remains modestly developed. However, DM may be seen in direct continuation of the work disability prevention paradigm (Loisel & Anema 2013).…”

Section: Discussion and Wider Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We acknowledge that the lack of inclusion of Cochrane database in the literature search could be a potential limitation. However, a recent systematic review conducted by the lead author (Gensby 2012) found no Cochrane reviews published within the CMD group that met the definition and eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review. Google Scholar advanced search options was used to search the web to identify unpublished studies.…”

Section: Identifying Relevant Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Employer Strategies for Preventing Mental Health Related Work Disability: A Scoping Review

Gensby

Limborg

Mahood

et al. 2019

NJWLS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined Nordic research on psychosocial work environment and disability management, specifically employer strategies for preventing work disability in common mental disorders (CMDs). A scoping review was performed to identify strategies across several research databases, alongside contact with content experts, hand-searching of non-indexed journals, and internet searches. Identification and selection of relevant studies, charting of data, and collating and summarizing of results was done using a six-step framework for conducting scoping reviews. Several key elements and knowledge gaps were identified in current prevention approaches and workplace initiatives across the included studies. We propose a program theory for workplace prevention of CMD-related work disability. The program theory may help specify employer strategies, and bridge activities with stakeholders outside the workplace.

show abstract

“…While the authors conducted a systematic search, assessed the strength of the evidence, and included data in evidence tables, they did not report effect sizes or perform a meta-analysis, making it difficult to judge and compare the effectiveness of the interventions. Other systematic reviews are more limited in scope, focusing on (a) specific countries (e.g., Bambra, Whithead, & Hamilton, 2004;Clayton et al, 2011); (b) single aspects of disability/illness, such as autism (e.g., Westbrook et al, 2012), mental illness (e.g., Crowther, Marshall, Bond, & Huxley, 2001;Underwood, Thomas, Williams, & Thieba, 2006), multiple sclerosis (e.g., Khan, Ng, & Turner-Stokes, 2009), traumatic brain injury (e.g., Graham & West, 2012), low back pain (e.g., Tveito, Hysing, & Eriksen, 2004) or spinal cord injury (e.g., Lidal, Huynh, & BieringSørensen, 2007); or (c) particular intervention types, such as interventions based on an empowerment perspective (e.g., Varekamp, Verbeek, & Dijk, 2006), workplace disability management programmes (e.g., Gensby et al, 2012) or workplace-based return-to-work interventions (e.g., Franche et al, 2005). Some of these reviews use meta-analytic synthesis methods, but several are quite dated and none explicitly focus on programmes conducted in LMICs.…”

Section: Why It Is Important To Do This Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interventions to improve the labour market for adults living with physical and/or sensory disabilities in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Tripney¹,

Roulstone²,

Vigurs³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is an international grant-making NGO promoting evidence-informed development policies and programmes. We are the global leader in funding, producing and synthesising high-quality evidence of what works, for whom, how, why and at what cost. We believe that using better and policy-relevant evidence helps to make development more effective and improve people's lives. 3ie systematic reviews 3ie systematic reviews appraise and synthesise the available high-quality evidence on the effectiveness of social and economic development interventions in low-and middleincome countries. These reviews follow scientifically recognised review methods, and are peer-reviewed and quality assured according to internationally accepted standards. 3ie is providing leadership in demonstrating rigorous and innovative review methodologies, such as using theory-based approaches suited to inform policy and programming in the dynamic contexts and challenges of low-and middle-income countries. About this reviewInterventions to improve the labour market for adults living with physical and/or sensory disabilities in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review, was submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of grant SR4.1038 awarded under Systematic Review Window 4. This review is available on the 3ie website. 3ie is publishing this technical report as received from the authors; it has been formatted to 3ie style, however the tables and figures have not been reformatted. This review has also been published in the Campbell Collaboration Library and is available here.All content is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not represent the opinions of 3ie, its donors or its board of commissioners. Any errors are also the sole responsibility of the authors. Comments or queries should be directed to the corresponding author, Janice Tripney at J.Tripney@ioe.ac.uk Funding for this systematic review was provided by Sightsavers. Executive summary BackgroundDisability is a development issue, with widespread poverty, inequality and violation of human rights. Recent estimates suggest that more than one billion people are living with some form of disability. Persons with disabilities are over-represented among the world's poor, and significant labour market disadvantage helps maintain the link between poverty and disability in many country contexts. The costs of disability are particularly acute in low-and middle-income countries (those with gross national income per capita of less than $12,616), where up to 80% of people with disabilities of working age can be unemployed, around twice that for their counterparts in high-income countries. When people with disabilities do work, they generally do so for longer hours and lower incomes, have fewer chances of promotion, are more likely to work in the informal labour market, and are at greater risk of becoming unemployed for longer periods. The barriers faced by people with disabilities globally in accessing and sustaining paid work ...

show abstract

Workplace Disability Management Programs Promoting Return to Work: A Systematic Review

Cited by 26 publications

References 114 publications

Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews

Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews

Employer Strategies for Preventing Mental Health Related Work Disability: A Scoping Review

Interventions to improve the labour market for adults living with physical and/or sensory disabilities in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About