An exploration of alternative methods for assessing return-to-work success following occupational injury

Tools to assess employment readiness for colorectal cancer survivors: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The ability to return to work and remain at work is an important recovery milestone after a cancer diagnosis. With the projected number of colorectal cancer patients of working age likely to increase, it is important to identify when a person is ready to resume work. There are many employment-related tools available to help people return to work after injury or illness; however, it is unknown which may be suitable for a person with colorectal cancer.

AIM

To identify tools related to employment readiness in colorectal cancer survivors and to chart the relevant factors of employment assessed by these tools.

METHOD

Literature searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase and Medline, the Cochrane library and PsycINFO using search terms around cancer, survivorship and employment to identify all peer-reviewed articles published in English up to June 2022.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies used a total of 77 tools focused on assessing employment issues experienced by people with cancer in general. Four tools were used with colorectal cancer survivors. None considered all relevant employment-related factors for colorectal cancer survivors.

CONCLUSION

Tools used to identify return-to-work and remain-at-work were not specific to colorectal cancer. There are a range of existing tools that collate some, but not all, of the domains and outcome criteria required to meet the employment needs of colorectal cancer survivors. To optimize work outcomes for the working colorectal cancer population, a specified tool is warranted.

Employment effects for people with disabilities after participation in vocational training programmes: A cohort analysis using propensity score matching

BACKGROUND: Vocational rehabilitation (VR) aims to help people with disabilities to return to the labour market. Though, there is not much evidence on its effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: We explore the effect of vocational training programmes in VR and the VR status itself on employment outcomes. METHODS: Using two samples from administrative data by the German Federal Employment Agency, we applied propensity score matching. We followed rehabilitants commencing VR in 2009/2010 (N = 7,905) for four years (comparison I) and general training participants with and without VR status completing training in 2012/2013 (N = 21,020) for one year (comparison II). For harmonisation purposes, we only considered individuals aged between 25 and 40 and excluded those in employment at the beginning of VR or training. RESULTS: Concerning the effect of training in VR (comparison I), we observe a lock-in effect during training (p < 0.001) due to an involvement in VR; after training, participants are more likely to obtain unsubsidised employment (0.05, p < 0.05) than non-participants, but there is no statistically significant income difference after four years. Regarding the effect of the VR status (comparison II), rehabilitants are more likely to take up (un-)subsidised employment (0.04, p < 0.01; 0.02, p < 0.001) after training, exhibit longer employment durations (19 days, p < 0.001) and achieve higher average incomes (2,414 euro/year, p < 0.001) compared to non-rehabilitants. CONCLUSIONS: Training participation helps to improve employment participation of rehabilitants. However, a longer observation period is recommended. Furthermore, the VR status itself leads to more sustainable and better-paid employment. This is due to more comprehensive support and longer-term subsidised employment opportunities.

eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review was to identify studies combining the concepts of eHealth and work participation for sick-listed employees across diagnostic groups in health care and workplace contexts.

INTRODUCTION

There is an increased demand for better health care services and technologies, and eHealth is proposed as a useful tool to improve efficiency and reduce costs. eHealth functions at the intersection of medical informatics, public health, and business, and may be a promising solution for managing the process of return to work among employees on sick leave. Assessment of work outcomes is essential in evaluating the effectiveness of health services, and there is a need to map the research literature on existing eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review considered studies combining two core concepts: eHealth and work participation. It considered studies on eHealth interventions for employees (18 to 65 years of age) on sick leave due to any type of diagnosis or disability, conducted by any stakeholder in workplace or health care contexts and in any country. Empirical data from both quantitative and qualitative studies were included.

METHODS

Published and unpublished studies from January 1, 2008, to August 21, 2020, written in English were included in this review. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, WHO clinical registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov. A three-step search strategy was followed. Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers and undertaken using an extraction tool developed specifically for the scoping review objectives.

RESULTS

This review identified 15 studies eligible for inclusion. Four studies delivered the eHealth intervention by telephone, while 10 interventions were web-based. Of the web-based interventions, five had a blended approach, such as website and email support, or website and social media platforms. One study used an app-based intervention. Only eight studies targeted employees sick-listed due to common sick leave diagnoses, such as common mental disorders and musculoskeletal disorders. The workplace context was the target of the eHealth intervention in seven studies, although the intervention was still delivered by health personnel such as therapists or occupational physicians. Collaboration on individual cases between the health professional, employer, and employee to facilitate work participation seemed to be rare. Four studies reported both a theoretical and an empirical base for the intervention used.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrated that the use of eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation is limited, and there is a need for future studies on the use of eHealth technology for this purpose. Developing eHealth interventions specifically for populations at risk of long-term sick leave, and encouraging collaboration between all relevant stakeholders, may help improve work participation.

Understanding the Process and Challenges for Return-to-Work Post-Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation from a Musculoskeletal Perspective: A Narrative Review

The current paper seeks to inform healthcare professionals on how adapting various components of return to work (RTW) programs that are already in use by other musculoskeletal rehabilitation settings can help optimize return to work process for patients with or without musculoskeletal manifestations, posthematopoietic cell transplantation. Since there is no universally agreed RTW structure for hematopoietic cell transplant patients, a narrative approach has been taken utilizing evidence from the existing musculoskeletal return to work assessment publications to help draw parallel for the hematopoietic cell transplant patients. Databases were searched including PUBMED, CINHAL, AMED, SCOPUS, and Cochrane using keywords RTW, functional restoration program, hematopoietic cell transplant, bone marrow transplant, stem cell transplant, and musculoskeletal functional assessment. The authors have managed to outline and propose a structured RTW assessment and monitoring program which can aid in getting patients back to employment by utilizing the functional capacity and job evaluation to help hematopoietic cell transplantation patients reintegrate socially. Patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplant require additional support and a robust assessment system to allow safe RTW. The proposed model of RTW assessment can prove to be beneficial in helping patients return to work safely. Clinical Significance. To acknowledge the individuality in functional limitation is important in determining not only the rehab needs but also the RTW capabilities. The proposed RTW plan not only promotes an individualized approach to patients but also provides a structure for return to work assessments for hematopoietic cell transplantation patients, thus, eliminating the need for guess work by healthcare professionals. In line with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) recommendations, a RTW assessment combined with a job evaluation helps healthcare professionals and stakeholders to understand the unique challenges and strengths of a patient and thereby design an individualized therapy approach.

Outcomes of an interdisciplinary work rehabilitation program

BACKGROUND:

Work rehabilitation programs were developed to help workers with an injury return to work (RTW). While studies have examined intervention characteristics, prognostic factors, and disability level, there is little or no research examining interdisciplinary interventions, lifting capacity/strength and the level of a patient’s RTW status (e.g., not working, new job, or ongoing restrictions) at the time of discharge.

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate outcomes (RTW status and lifting capacity/strength changes) of an interdisciplinary work rehabilitation program and examine whether time off work prior to the program and type of injury were related to RTW status and strength changes.

METHODS:

A retrospective database analysis was conducted with a sample of 495 participants (M_age = 44.44 years, SD = 10.13) of which 375 (76%) were male. Participants were workers with injuries who participated in an interdisciplinary work rehabilitation program from 2006 to 2010.

RESULTS:

A significantly higher number of participants were working at the end of the program than at the beginning (83.9% vs. 31.6%, p < 0.0001). Mean strength was higher at the time of discharge compared to at admission (p < 0.0001). The participants that did not RTW had had significantly more days off work prior to the program (U = 11757, z = –3.152, p = 0.002). The type of injury was not related to strength at the time of discharge.

CONCLUSIONS:

Findings suggest the interdisciplinary program is associated with positive outcomes and early intervention may be an important factor when treating patients with work-related injuries.

Able or unable to work? Life trajectory after severe occupational injury

Purpose: To study the probabilities and permanence of return to work, inability to work and rehabilitation, and to explore the connection between these life situations and later working after a severe occupational injury. Materials and methods: A historical cohort of Finnish workers with a severe occupational injury during 2008 (N = 11,585) were followed up annually on the outcomes of return to work over a 5-year observation period. We examined transition probabilities from one life situation to another with Markov chain analysis, and applied logistic regression with generalized estimating equations to assess the effect of register-based determinants on return to work. Results: Within the five anniversaries, 85% of the injured were working, 9% were unable to work (fully or partly) and 2% received rehabilitation. Age, gross annual income, type of work, injured body part, injury type and the injured's annual condition subsequent to the work injury were significant determinants of return to work. Conclusions: The probability of return to work decreased with time, but, on average, one-fifth of the injured workers succeeded in return to work after being unable to work on the previous anniversary, which indicates that it is worthwhile to conduct efforts for this target group in order to promote return to work. Implications for Rehabilitation The current life situation of the injured should be taken into account when promoting return to work, as it is a strong predictor of later working after a serious occupational injury. Rehabilitation and return to work programs should start in time due to declining return to work rates as the disability continues. Return to work on a part-time basis could be a good option during the early phases of recovery, since a notable proportion of those partly unable to work on the first anniversary returned later to full-time workers. The probability of recovery is relatively high even for those with long-term disabilities, so the promotion of return to work is highly recommended also for this target group.

Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research: A Review with Recommendations for Future Research

Introduction Outcome assessment is a central issue in work disability prevention research. The goal of this paper was to (1) ascertain the most salient workplace outcomes; (2) evaluate the congruence between business and science perspectives; (3) illustrate new perspectives on assessing longitudinal outcomes; and (4) provide recommendations for advancing outcome evaluation in this area of research. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration that culminated in a sponsored 3-day conference, "Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability", held October 14-16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience. Results Numerous workplace work-disability prevention outcome measures were identified. Analysis indicated that their applicability varied depending on the type of work disability the worker was experiencing. For those who were working, but with health-related work limitations (Type 1), predominant outcomes were measures of productivity, presenteeism, and work-related limitations. For those who were off work due to a health condition (Type 2), predominant outcomes were measures of time off work, supervisor/employee interactions, and return-to-work (RTW) preparation. For those who had returned to work (Type 3), predominant outcomes were measures of presenteeism, time until RTW, percentage of work resumption, employment characteristics, stigma, work engagement, co-worker interactions, and sustained or durable RTW. For those who had withdrawn from the labor force (Type 4), predominant outcomes were cost and vocational status. Discussion Currently available measures provide a good basis to use more consistent outcomes in disability prevention in the future. The research area would also benefit from more involvement of employers as stakeholders, and multilevel conceptualizations of disability outcomes.

Work-Related Factors Considered by Sickness-Absent Employees When Estimating Timeframes for Returning to Work

INTRODUCTION

Work-related factors have been found to be influential in shaping a number of return-to-work outcomes including return-to-work expectations. Based on the idea that work-related factors have the potential for modification through workplace-based initiatives, this study involved a detailed examination of work-related factors referenced by workers as being taken into consideration when estimating timeframes for returning to work.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted with 30 employees, currently off work (≤ 3 months) due to a musculoskeletal condition. During the focus groups, participants wrote and spoke about the factors that they considered when forming their expectations for returning to work. Data were subjected to thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

Discussions revealed that participants' considerations tended to differ depending on whether or not they had a job to return to. Those with jobs (n = 23) referenced specific influences such as working relationships, accommodations, physical and practical limitations, as well as concerns about their ability to do their job. Those without a job to return to (n = 7) talked about the ways they would go about finding work, and how long they thought this would take. Both groups mentioned the influence of wanting to find the "right" job, retraining and being limited due to the need for income.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate that employees reference numerous work-related factors when estimating their timeframes for returning to work, and that many of these have been previously identified as relating to other return-to-work outcomes. Findings suggest the potential to improve return-to-work expectation through addressing work-related influences, and helping people work through the tasks they need to complete in order to move forward in the return-to-work process.