A systematic review of studies identifying predictors of poor return to work outcomes following workplace injury

Work ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 373-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara D. Street ◽  
Sarah J. Lacey
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Return To Work ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Workplace Injury

Return to Work After Primary Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652097542
Author(s):  
Eric D. Haunschild ◽  
Ron Gilat ◽  
Ophelie Lavoie-Gagne ◽  
Michael C. Fu ◽  
Tracy Tauro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Return To Work ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Work Intensity ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
Cuff Repair

Background: Rotator cuff tears are a prevalent pathology in injured workers, causing significant economic ramifications and time away from work. To date, published articles on work outcomes after rotator cuff repair have not been cumulatively assessed and analyzed. Purpose: To systematically review reports on return to work after rotator cuff repair and perform a meta-analysis on factors associated with improved work outcomes. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of return-to-work investigations was performed using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Individual studies reporting rates of return to previous work with level of evidence 1 to 4 were independently screened by 2 authors for inclusion, and study quality was assessed using the Methodologic Index for Non-randomized Studies and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Work outcome data were synthesized and analyzed using random effects modeling to identify differences in rates of return to previous work as a function of operative technique, work intensity, and workers’ compensation status. Results: Thirteen retrospective investigations comprising 1224 patients who underwent rotator cuff repair met inclusion criteria for this investigation. Across all investigations, a weighted average of 62.3% of patients returned to previous level of work at 8.15 ± 2.7 months (mean ± SD) after surgery. Based on random effects modeling, higher rates of return to previous work were identified with decreasing work intensity ( P < .001), while rates were similar between open and arthroscopic repair technique ( P = .418) and between workers’ compensation and non–workers’ compensation cohorts ( P = .089). All shoulder pain and functional outcome assessments demonstrated significant improvements at final follow-up when compared with baseline across all investigations. Conclusion: The majority of injured workers undergoing rotator cuff repair return to previous work at approximately 8 months after surgery. Despite this, >35% of patients are unable to return to their previous work level after their repair procedure. Similar rates of return to work can be anticipated regardless of workers’ compensation status and operative technique, while patients in occupations with higher physical intensity experience inferior work outcomes.

scholarly journals Rehabilitation interventions to support return to work for women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naomi Algeo ◽  
Kathleen Bennett ◽  
Deirdre Connolly
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Return To Work ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Specific Content ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Research recommends the development and evaluation of interventions to support women with breast cancer in returning to, or managing, work. Despite this, there has historically been a paucity of rehabilitation interventions to support women with breast cancer to maintain or return to their work role. The aim of this systematic review was to examine key characteristics of rehabilitation interventions, and their effectiveness on work outcomes for women with breast cancer, compared to usual care. Methods A systematic review was conducted of controlled studies of rehabilitation interventions with work outcomes for women with breast cancer. Six databases were systematically searched: EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Results are presented either as pooled odds ratio (OR) or pooled effect size (hedges g) between groups, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Narrative synthesis was conducted on intervention outcomes not suitable for meta-analysis. Results Five thousand, five hundred and thirty-five studies were identified. Nine out of 28 abstracts met inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes precluded meta-analysis for most outcomes. Of the interventions included in meta-analysis, no significant differences compared to usual care were found for sick leave (2 studies (12 months); OR 1.11 (95% CI: 0.66 to 1.87), number of sick days taken (2 studies (six months); difference in effect: -0.08, (95% CI: -0.48 to 0.38) or working hours (2 studies (12 months); 0.19, (95% CI: -0.20 to 0.64). Only one study, with a multidisciplinary intervention, showed a significant difference for work outcomes when compared to usual care. Work-specific content featured in three interventions only, none of which provided conclusive evidence for improvement in work outcomes. Enhanced physical and psychological sequalae, and quality of life was observed in some studies. Conclusion There remains a lack of effective and methodologically rigorous rehabilitation intervention studies for breast cancer survivors. The development and evaluation of effective rehabilitation interventions to support return to work is warranted.

scholarly journals The Influence of Social Support and Social Integration Factors on Return to Work Outcomes for Individuals with Work-Related Injuries: A Systematic Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 636-659 ◽  
Author(s):  
Codi White ◽  
Rebecca A. Green ◽  
Samantha Ferguson ◽  
Sarah L. Anderson ◽  
Caroline Howe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Support ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Return To Work ◽  
Social Integration ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Work Related

scholarly journals Rehabilitation interventions to support return to work for women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Naomi Algeo ◽  
Kathleen Bennett ◽  
Deirdre Connolly
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Return To Work ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Specific Content ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Research recommends the development and evaluation of interventions to support women with breast cancer in returning to, or managing, work. Despite this, there has historically been a paucity of rehabilitation interventions to support women with breast cancer to maintain or return to their work role. The aim of this systematic review was to examine key characteristics of rehabilitation interventions, and their effectiveness on work outcomes for women with breast cancer, compared to usual care. Methods A systematic review was conducted of controlled studies of rehabilitation interventions with work outcomes for women with breast cancer. Six databases were systematically searched: EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Results are presented either as pooled odds ratio (OR) or pooled effect size (hedges g) between groups, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Narrative synthesis was conducted on intervention outcomes not suitable for meta-analysis. Results Five thousand, five hundred and thirty-five studies were identified. Nine out of 28 abstracts met inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes precluded meta-analysis for most outcomes. Of the interventions included in meta-analysis, no significant differences compared to usual care were found for sick leave (2 studies (12 months); OR 1.11 (95% CI: 0.66 to 1.87), number of sick days taken (2 studies (six months); difference in effect: − 0.08, (95% CI: − 0.48 to 0.38) or working hours (2 studies (12 months); 0.19, (95% CI: − 0.20 to 0.64). Only one study, with a multidisciplinary intervention, showed a significant difference for work outcomes when compared to usual care. Work-specific content featured in three interventions only, none of which provided conclusive evidence for improvement in work outcomes. Enhanced physical and psychological sequalae, and quality of life was observed in some studies. Conclusion There remains a lack of effective and methodologically rigorous rehabilitation intervention studies for breast cancer survivors. The development and evaluation of effective rehabilitation interventions to support return to work is warranted.

scholarly journals Exploring the factors of workplace injury and chronic illness in return-to-work outcomes

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hafez Hussain
Keyword(s):  
Return To Work ◽  
Multiple Regression ◽  
Occupational Injury ◽  
Initial Study ◽  
Rehabilitation Program ◽  
Chronic Illnesses ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Work Rehabilitation ◽  
Workplace Injury ◽  
Hierarchical Multiple Regression

Objective: The study aims to explore factors of workplace injury and chronic illnesses patients in a return to work program which are associated with return to work outcomes. Design: A retrospective cohort study. Setting: Return to Work Department, Social Security Organisation, Malaysia.Method: All participants of the Return to Work Rehabilitation Program who were absent from work due to workplace injury and chronic illnesses between January 2008 and December 2013 with no other history of injury were included. The main outcome of the study was the number in days from day one of injury prior to return of gainful employment. Hierarchical multiple regression methods were used to determine the identified factors that influence the return to work outcome.Results: An initial study with data from January 2008 and December 2011 of cases with occupational injury showed 66% (n = 1,552) of the participants had returned to work. The average number of days to return to work was 201 days. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis identified duration of referral to the Return to Work rehabilitation program, monthly salary, Whole Person Impairment ratings, DASS 21 anxiety and DASS 21 stress scale as factors that influenced return to work, explaining 32% of the variance. However an analysis of the remaining cases such as cases with chronic illnesses will be included in the final results of this study.Conclusion: Currently, a total of 66% participants had returned to employment after occupational injury. It is essential to understand the complex pathway from the point of injury and illnesses until returning to work in order to develop more effective return to work practices.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Psychological and Work Outcomes in Open-Plan and Cellular Office Designs: A Systematic Review

SAGE Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 215824402098886
Author(s):  
Olivia James ◽  
Paul Delfabbro ◽  
Daniel L. King
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Social Relationships ◽  
Social Relationship ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Health Satisfaction ◽  
Financial Benefits ◽  
Open Plan ◽  
Employee Characteristics ◽  
Design Factors

A high percentage of information-based work is now conducted in open-plan offices as opposed to traditional cellular offices. In this systematic review, we compare health, work, and social outcomes as well as employee outcomes for workers in the two environments. From a total of 10,242 papers reviewed, we identified 31 papers which met strict inclusion/exclusion criteria of allowing a direct comparison between the office types. The results showed that working in open-plan workplace designs is associated with more negative outcomes on many measures relating to health, satisfaction, productivity, and social relationship. Notable health outcomes included decreased overall health and increased stress. Environmental characteristics of particular concern included noise and distractions, poor privacy, lighting and glare, and poorer temperature control. Most studies indicated negative effects on social relationships and interactions. Overall, the findings showed that while open-plan workplace designs may offer financial benefits for management, these appear to be offset by the intangible costs associated with the negative effects on workers. The study encourages further focused investigations into design factors as well as employee characteristics that might contribute to better outcomes in open-plan designs.

scholarly journals A randomised feasibility trial of an employer-based intervention for enhancing successful return to work of cancer survivors (MiLES intervention)

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Greidanus ◽  
A. E. de Rijk ◽  
A. G. E. M. de Boer ◽  
M. E. M. M. Bos ◽  
P. W. Plaisier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Return To Work ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Feasibility Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Secondary Effect ◽  
Quality Of Working Life ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Employers express a need for support during sickness absence and return to work (RTW) of cancer survivors. Therefore, a web-based intervention (MiLES) targeted at employers with the objective of enhancing cancer survivors’ successful RTW has been developed. This study aimed to assess feasibility of a future definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention. Also preliminary results on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention were obtained. Methods A randomised feasibility trial of 6 months was undertaken with cancer survivors aged 18–63 years, diagnosed with cancer < 2 years earlier, currently in paid employment, and sick-listed < 1 year. Participants were randomised to an intervention group, with their employer receiving the MiLES intervention, or to a waiting-list control group (2:1). Feasibility of a future definitive RCT was determined on the basis of predefined criteria related to method and protocol-related uncertainties (e.g. reach, retention, appropriateness). The primary effect measure (i.e. successful RTW) and secondary effect measures (e.g. quality of working life) were assessed at baseline and 3 and 6 months thereafter. Results Thirty-five cancer survivors were included via medical specialists (4% of the initially invited group) and open invitations, and thereafter randomised to the intervention (n = 24) or control group (n = 11). Most participants were female (97%) with breast cancer (80%) and a permanent employment contract (94%). All predefined criteria for feasibility of a future definitive RCT were achieved, except that concerning the study’s reach (90 participants). After 6 months, 92% of the intervention group and 100% of the control group returned to work (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.81–1.03); no difference were found with regard to secondary effect measures. Conclusions With the current design a future definitive RCT on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention on successful RTW of cancer survivors is not feasible, since recruitment of survivors fell short of the predefined minimum for feasibility. There was selection bias towards survivors at low risk of adverse work outcomes, which reduced generalisability of the outcomes. An alternative study design is needed to study effectiveness of the MiLES intervention. Trial registration The study has been registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NL6758/NTR7627).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document