Clinician-patient agreement about the work disability problem of patients having persistent pain: why it matters

Aligning stakeholders' understandings of the return-to-work process: a qualitative study on workplace meetings in inpatient multimodal occupational rehabilitation

Purpose: Although it is believed that involving the workplace and stakeholders in return-to-work interventions is beneficial, Norwegian occupational rehabilitation programmes rarely do. During 2015–2016, Hysnes Rehabilitation Centre provided inpatient multimodal occupational rehabilitation, including workplace meetings with employees, supervisors, and rehabilitation therapists. This study aims to explore the meetings´ content and stakeholders´ experiences.Methods: This was a multiple case study including non-participant observation of workplace meetings and interviews with participantsResults: Essential features of meetings included revealing and aligning the employee’s and supervisor’s understandings. Three components seemed instrumental in developing shared understandings leading to appropriate adjustments: 1) disclosing causes of absence, 2) validating difficulties, attitudes, and efforts, and 3) delimiting responsibility. Therapists played a vital role in addressing these components, supporting employees, and ensuring planning of appropriate solutions.Conclusion: Developing shared understandings by addressing and aligning illness- and return-to-work representations appears important for return-to-work interventions. Although pivotal to developing appropriate adjustments, disclosure depends upon supervisors’ display of understanding and should not be encouraged without knowledge of the employee´s work situation. How supervisors relate to employees and implement adjustments may be as important as the types of adjustments. The therapist’s support and validation of employees in vulnerable situations also seem valuable.Trial registration: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02541890), 4 September 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02541890.

Validation of the Work Disability Diagnosis Interview for Musculoskeletal and Mental Disorders

Purpose The Work Disability Diagnosis Interview (WoDDI) consists of a semi-structured interview designed to help clinicians systematically identify the factors contributing to a work disability. The aim was to validate two versions of the WoDDI (construct validity, internal consistency, interrater reliability) developed for individuals absent from work due to a musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) or common mental disorder (CMD). Methods A convenience sample of workers absent from work for at least three months due to an MSD or a CMD and enrolled in a rehabilitation program was recruited. To assess interrater reliability for the MSD and CMD versions, six occupational therapists by sub-group scored the WoDDI based on case histories. Results A total of 290 male and female workers (140 MSD, 150 CMD) were recruited. Exploratory factor analysis revealed similar dimensions in both versions, specifically, illness representation, clinical judgment of the complexity of the medical condition, and high level of work demands. It allowed items to be reduced by approximately 20 and 40% respectively for the CMD and MSD versions. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) varied from 0.40 to 0.75 and 0.75 to 0.80 for the CMD and MSD versions respectively, while interrater reliability (Cohen's kappa coefficients) varied from 0.51 to 0.57 and 0.27 to 0.44 for the two versions respectively. Conclusion Despite some limitations, the WoDDI's factors correspond to those in the current scientific literature. The varying results for internal consistency suggest limitations mainly for the CMD version. Interrater reliability was found overall to be fair. The next step will be to revise and retest this version.

A logic model for a self-management program designed to help workers with persistent and disabling low back pain stay at work

BACKGROUND

Workers with persistent disabling low back pain (LBP) often encounter difficulty staying at work. Self-management (SM) programs can offer interesting avenues to help workers stay at work.

OBJECTIVE

To establish the plausibility of a logic model operationalizing a SM program designed to help workers with persistent disabling LBP stay at work.

METHODS

We used a qualitative design. A preliminary version of the logic model was developed based on the literature and McLaughlin et al.'s framework for logic models. Clinicians in work rehabilitation completed an online survey on the plausibility of the logic model and proposed modifications, which were discussed in a focus group. Thematic analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 11) found the model plausible, contingent upon a few modifications. They raised the importance of making more explicit the margin of maneuver or "job leeway" for a worker who is trying to stay at work and suggested emphasizing a capability approach. Enhancing the workers' perceived self-efficacy and communication skills were deemed essential tasks of the model.

CONCLUSION

A plausible logic model for a SM program designed for workers with disabling LBP stay at work was developed. The next step will be to assess its acceptability with potential users.

The work of return to work. Challenges of returning to work when you have chronic pain: a meta-ethnography

AIMS

To understand obstacles to returning to work, as perceived by people with chronic non-malignant pain and as perceived by employers, and to develop a conceptual model.

DESIGN

Synthesis of qualitative research using meta-ethnography.

DATA SOURCES

Eleven bibliographic databases from inception to April 2017 supplemented by citation tracking.

REVIEW METHODS

We used the methods of meta-ethnography. We identified concepts and conceptual categories, and developed a conceptual model and line of argument.

RESULTS

We included 41 studies. We identified three core categories in the conceptual model: managing pain, managing work relationships and making workplace adjustments. All were influenced by societal expectations in relation to work, self (self-belief, self-efficacy, legitimacy, autonomy and the meaning of work for the individual), health/illness/pain representations, prereturn to work support and rehabilitation, and system factors (healthcare, workplace and social security). A mismatch of expectations between the individual with pain and the workplace contributed to a feeling of being judged and difficulties asking for help. The ability to navigate obstacles and negotiate change underpinned mastering return to work despite the pain. Where this ability was not apparent, there could be a downward spiral resulting in not working.

CONCLUSIONS

For people with chronic pain, and for their employers, navigating obstacles to return to work entails balancing the needs of (1) the person with chronic pain, (2) work colleagues and (3) the employing organisation. Managing pain, managing work relationships and making workplace adjustments appear to be central, but not straightforward, and require substantial effort to culminate in a successful return to work.

Acceptability and Feasibility of a Shared Decision-Making Model in Work Rehabilitation: A Mixed-Methods Study of Stakeholders' Perspectives

Purpose To establish the acceptability and feasibility of implementing a shared decision-making (SDM) model in work rehabilitation. Methods We used a sequential mixed-methods design with diverse stakeholder groups (representatives of private and public employers, insurers, and unions, as well as workers having participated in a work rehabilitation program). First, a survey using a self-administered questionnaire enabled stakeholders to rate their level of agreement with the model's acceptability and feasibility and propose modifications, if necessary. Second, eight focus groups representing key stakeholders (n = 34) and four one-on-one interviews with workers were conducted, based on the questionnaire results. For each stakeholder group, we computed the percentage of agreement with the model's acceptability and feasibility and performed thematic analyses of the transcripts. Results Less than 50% of each stakeholder group initially agreed with the overall acceptability and feasibility of the model. Stakeholders proposed 37 modifications to the objectives, 17 to the activities, and 39 to improve the model's feasibility. Based on in-depth analysis of the transcripts, indicators were added to one objective, an interview guide was added as proposed by insurers to ensure compliance of the SDM process with insurance contract requirements, and one objective was reformulated. Conclusion Despite initially low agreement with the model's acceptability on the survey, subsequent discussions led to three minor changes and contributed to the model's ultimate acceptability and feasibility. Later steps will involve assessing the extent of implementation of the model in real rehabilitation settings to see if other modifications are necessary before assessing its impact.

A meta-ethnography of health-care professionals’ experience of treating adults with chronic non-malignant pain to improve the experience and quality of health care

Background

People with chronic pain do not always feel that they are being listened to or valued by health-care professionals (HCPs). We aimed to understand and improve this experience by finding out what HCPs feel about providing health care to people with chronic non-malignant pain. We did this by bringing together the published qualitative research.

Objectives

(1) To undertake a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) to increase our understanding of what it is like for HCPs to provide health care to people with chronic non-malignant pain; (2) to make our findings easily available and accessible through a short film; and (3) to contribute to the development of methods for QESs.

Design

We used the methods of meta-ethnography, which involve identifying concepts and progressively abstracting these concepts into a line of argument.

Data sources

We searched five electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database) from inception to November 2016. We included studies that explored HCPs’ experiences of providing health care to people with chronic non-malignant pain. We utilised the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) framework to rate our confidence in the findings.

Results

We screened 954 abstracts and 184 full texts and included 77 studies reporting the experiences of > 1551 HCPs. We identified six themes: (1) a sceptical cultural lens and the siren song of diagnosis; (2) navigating juxtaposed models of medicine; (3) navigating the patient–clinician borderland; (4) the challenge of dual advocacy; (5) personal costs; and (6) the craft of pain management. We produced a short film, ‘Struggling to support people to live a valued life with chronic pain’, which presents these themes (seeReport Supplementary Material 1; URL:www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hsdr/1419807/#/documentation; accessed 24 July 2017). We rated our confidence in the review findings using the GRADE-CERQual domains. We developed a conceptual model to explain the complexity of providing health care to people with chronic non-malignant pain. The innovation of this model is to propose a series of tensions that are integral to the experience: a dualistic biomedical model compared with an embodied psychosocial model; professional distance compared with proximity; professional expertise compared with patient empowerment; the need to make concessions to maintain therapeutic relationships compared with the need for evidence-based utility; and patient advocacy compared with health-care system advocacy.

Limitations

There are no agreed methods for determining confidence in QESs.

Conclusions

We highlight areas that help us to understand why the experience of health care can be difficult for patients and HCPs. Importantly, HCPs can find it challenging if they are unable to find a diagnosis and at times this can make them feel sceptical. The findings suggest that HCPs find it difficult to balance their dual role of maintaining a good relationship with the patient and representing the health-care system. The ability to support patients to live a valued life with pain is described as a craft learnt through experience. Finally, like their patients, HCPs can experience a sense of loss because they cannot solve the problem of pain.

Future work

Future work to explore the usefulness of the conceptual model and film in clinical education would add value to this study. There is limited primary research that explores HCPs’ experiences with chronic non-malignant pain in diverse ethnic groups, in gender-specific contexts and in older people living in the community.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Meta-ethnography to understand healthcare professionals' experience of treating adults with chronic non-malignant pain

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to explore healthcare professionals' experience of treating chronic non-malignant pain by conducting a qualitative evidence synthesis. Understanding this experience from the perspective of healthcare professionals will contribute to improvements in the provision of care.

DESIGN

Qualitative evidence synthesis using meta-ethnography. We searched five electronic bibliographic databases from inception to November 2016. We included studies that explore healthcare professionals' experience of treating adults with chronic non-malignant pain. We used the GRADE-CERQual framework to rate confidence in review findings.

RESULTS

We screened the 954 abstracts and 184 full texts and included 77 published studies reporting the experiences of over 1551 international healthcare professionals including doctors, nurses and other health professionals. We abstracted six themes: (1) a sceptical cultural lens, (2) navigating juxtaposed models of medicine, (3) navigating the geography between patient and clinician, (4) challenge of dual advocacy, (5) personal costs and (6) the craft of pain management. We rated confidence in review findings as moderate to high.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first qualitative evidence synthesis of healthcare professionals' experiences of treating people with chronic non-malignant pain. We have presented a model that we developed to help healthcare professionals to understand, think about and modify their experiences of treating patients with chronic pain. Our findings highlight scepticism about chronic pain that might explain why patients feel they are not believed. Findings also indicate a dualism in the biopsychosocial model and the complexity of navigating therapeutic relationships. Our model may be transferable to other patient groups or situations.

Characteristics of therapeutic alliance in musculoskeletal physiotherapy and occupational therapy practice: a scoping review of the literature

Background

Most conventional treatment for musculoskeletal conditions continue to show moderate effects, prompting calls for ways to increase effectiveness, including drawing from strategies used across other health conditions. Therapeutic alliance refers to the relational processes at play in treatment which can act in combination or independently of specific interventions. Current evidence guiding the use of therapeutic alliance in health care arises largely from psychotherapy and medicine literature. The objective of this review was to map out the available literature on therapeutic alliance conceptual frameworks, themes, measures and determinants in musculoskeletal rehabilitation across physiotherapy and occupational therapy disciplines.

Methods

A scoping review of the literature published in English since inception to July 2015 was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, PsychINFO, PEDro, SportDISCUS, AMED, OTSeeker, AMED and the grey literature. A key search term strategy was employed using “physiotherapy”, “occupational therapy”, “therapeutic alliance”, and “musculoskeletal” to identify relevant studies. All searches were performed between December 2014 and July 2015 with an updated search on January 2017. Two investigators screened article title, abstract and full text review for articles meeting the inclusion criteria and extracted therapeutic alliance data and details of each study.

Results

One hundred and thirty articles met the inclusion criteria including quantitative (33%), qualitative (39%), mixed methods (7%) and reviews and discussions (23%) and most data came from the USA (23%). Randomized trials and systematic reviews were 4.6 and 2.3% respectively. Low back pain condition (22%) and primary care (30.7%) were the most reported condition and setting respectively. One theory, 9 frameworks, 26 models, 8 themes and 42 subthemes of therapeutic alliance were identified. Twenty-six measures were identified; the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) was the most utilized measure (13%). Most of the therapeutic alliance themes extracted were from patient perspectives. The relationship between adherence and therapeutic alliance was examined by 26 articles of which 57% showed some correlation between therapeutic alliance and adherence. Age moderated the relationship between therapeutic alliance and adherence with younger individuals and an autonomy support environment reporting improved adherence. Prioritized goals, autonomy support and motivation were facilitators of therapeutic alliance.

Conclusion

Therapeutic Alliance has been studied in a limited extent in the rehabilitation literature with conflicting frameworks and findings. Potential benefits described for enhancing therapeutic alliance might include better exercise adherence. Several knowledge gaps have been identified with a potential for generating future research priorities for therapeutic alliance in musculoskeletal rehabilitation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2311-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The structure and process of workers' compensation systems and the role of doctors: A comparison of Ontario and Québec

BACKGROUND

This study sought to identify impacts of compensation system characteristics on doctors in Québec and Ontario.

METHODS

(i) Legal analysis; (ii) Qualitative methods applied to documentation and individual and group interviews with doctors (34) and other system participants (31); and (iii) Inter-jurisdictional transdisciplinary analysis involving cross-disciplinary comparative and integrative analysis of policy contexts, qualitative data, and the relationship between the two.

RESULTS

In both jurisdictions the compensation board controlled decisions on work-relatedness and doctors perceived the bureaucratic process negatively. Gatekeeping roles differed between jurisdictions both in initial adjudication and in dispute processes. Québec legislation gives greater weight to the opinion of the treating physician. These differences affected doctors' experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

Policy-makers should contextualize the sources of the "evidence" they rely on from intervention research because findings may reflect a system rather than an intervention effect. Researchers should consider policy contexts to both adequately design a study and interpret their results. Am. J. Ind. Med. 59:1070-1086, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Pain and Prejudice: Does Collecting Information From the Standpoint of Exposed Workers Improve Scientific Examination of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders?

The meaning, feasibility, and importance of scientific objectivity have been debated among public health scientists. The debate is particularly relevant to occupational health, because of frequent opposition between employer and worker interests. This article suggests that the concept of standpoint (J. Eakin) may be more useful than that of objectivity in framing discussion of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Studies done from a "worker" standpoint can, for example, investigate and characterize environmental risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders, while studies from an "employer" standpoint may concentrate on identifying individual workers likely to report work-related musculoskeletal disorders or those for whom consequences of work-related musculoskeletal disorders are more severe. Within "worker" standpoints, a distinction between "high-prestige worker" and "lower-prestige worker" standpoints can be identified in the current scientific debate about the health costs and benefits of prolonged standing vs prolonged sitting at work. Contact with workers, particularly lower-prestige workers, is critical to developing and sustaining a worker-based standpoint among researchers in occupational health. This contact can be facilitated by formal collaborations between universities and unions or other community groups.

Operationalizing a shared decision making model for work rehabilitation programs: a consensus process

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to design and operationalize shared decision making (SDM) rehabilitation model for worker rehabilitation programs. SDM has previously been shown to improve decision outcomes in patient-health care professional relationships. To date, SDM has not yet been adapted to work rehabilitation, although it could be a valuable approach to better understand and agree on return-to-work decisions.

METHODS

We designed a preliminary model for return-to-work decisions for workers suffering from pain due to musculoskeletal injuries. We submitted the preliminary model and a questionnaire to expert health care professionals. Using the Technique for Research of Information by Animation of a Group of Experts method, a group consensus process was used to discuss and refine the experts' responses to operationalize a model adapted for rehabilitation.

RESULTS

Eleven occupational therapists (three were clinical coordinators) and four psychologists participated in three group consensus sessions. The final version of the model included one general longitudinal objective (the maintenance of a working alliance and assuring mutual comprehension among all stakeholders), and 11 specific objectives: establishing a working alliance, seven in the deliberation phase of the SDM process, and three in the implementation of the decision. Participants also reached consensus on between 1 and 8 indicators per objective.

CONCLUSION

We developed and operationalized an SDM rehabilitation model intended for a return-to-work implementation plan. The next step will be to document its feasibility among the main stakeholders (employer, union, insurer and worker) taking part in decisions about return to work.

How do workers with common mental disorders experience a multidisciplinary return-to-work intervention? A qualitative study

PURPOSE

Long-term sick leave due to common mental disorders (CMD) is an increasing problem in many countries. Recent reviews indicate that return to work (RTW) interventions have limited effect on reducing sickness absence among this group of sick-listed. The aims of this study were to investigate how sick-listed persons with CMD experienced participating in an RTW intervention and how workability assessments and RTW activities influenced their RTW-process, and to examine the working mechanisms of the intervention. The gained knowledge can help improve future RTW intervention design and implementation.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted with 17 participants on sick leave due to CMD who participated in an RTW intervention. Interviews were conducted at three time points with each participant. Principles of interpretative phenomenological analyses guided the analysis.

RESULTS

The workability assessment consultations and RTW activities such as psychoeducative group sessions and individual sessions with psychologist could result in both motivation and frustration depending on the extent to which the RTW professionals practiced what we have termed an individual approach to the sick-listed person.

CONCLUSIONS

The individual approach seems necessary for the realization of the positive potential in the RTW intervention. However, the fact that RTW professionals are both the facilitators and the controllers of the sick-listed persons' RTW process is an inherent paradox in the intervention, which can impede the necessary establishment of a high-quality relationship between the sick-listed persons and RTW professionals.