Search

Background: Perception by workers of their health problems as work-related is possibly associated with sickness absence (SA). The aim of this study was to to study the relationship between perceived work-relatedness of health problems and SA among workers who visit their GP, taking the influence of other potential determinants into account and to study the influence of these determinants on SA. Design and setting prospective cohort study in 32 Dutch GP practices., Methods: A secondary analysis of RCT data among workers, aged 18-63 years, who visited their GP. We measured self-reported SA days in 12 months and high SA (>20 days in 12 months) and compared workers who perceived work-relatedness (WR+) with workers who did not (WR-). With multivariable linear and logistic regression models, we analyzed the influence of age, gender, experienced health, chronic illness, prior SA, number of GP consultations and perceived work ability., Results: We analyzed data of 209 workers, 31% perceived work-relatedness. Geometric mean of SA days was 1.6 (95% CI: 0.9-3.0) for WR+- workers and 1.2 (95% CI: 0.8-1.8) for WR- workers (P = 0.42). Incidence of high SA was 21.5 and 13.3%, respectively (odds ratio 1.79; 95% CI: 0.84-3.84). SA was positively associated with chronic illness, prior SA, low perceived work ability and age over 50., Conclusions: Perceived work-relatedness was not associated with SA. SA was associated with chronic illness, prior SA, low perceived work ability and age over 50., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: In the past decade, a considerable amount of research has been carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of innovative low back pain (LBP) interventions. Although some interventions proved to be effective, they are not always applied in daily practice. To successfully implement an innovative program it is important to identify barriers and facilitators in order to change practice routine. Because usual care is not directly aimed at return to work (RTW), we evaluated an integrated care program, combining a patient-directed and a workplace-directed intervention provided by a multidisciplinary team, including a clinical occupational physician to reduce occupational disability in chronic LBP patients. The aims of this study were to describe the feasibility of the implementation of the integrated care program, to assess the satisfaction and expectations of the involved stakeholders and to describe the needs for improvement of the program., Methods: Eligible for this study were patients who had been on sick leave due to chronic LBP. Data were collected from the patients, their supervisors and the involved health care professionals, by means of questionnaires and structured charts, during 3-month follow-up. Implementation, satisfaction and expectations were investigated., Results: Of the 40 patients who were eligible to participate in the integrated care program, 37 patients, their supervisors and the health care professionals actually participated in the intervention. Adherence to the integrated care program was in accordance with the protocol, and the patients, their supervisors and the health care professionals were (very) satisfied with the program. The role of the clinical occupational physician was of additional value in the RTW process. Time-investment was the only barrier for implementation reported by the multidisciplinary team., Conclusion: The implementation of this program will not be influenced by any flaws in its application that are related to the program itself, or to the adherence of patients with chronic LBP and their health care professionals. This program is promising in terms of feasibility, satisfaction and compliance of the patients, their supervisors and the health care professionals. Before implementation on a wider scale, the communication and the information technology of the program should be improved.

Objectives: To describe medical management by the general practitioner (GP) and occupational physician (OP) of workers sick listed due to mental health problems, and to determine agreement in diagnosis, main cause of sickness absence and obstacles in return to work., Methods: A cohort of 555 employees being sick listed for 12 to 20 weeks due to mental health problems was recruited and followed for 1 year. These employees were interviewed about their mental health and contacts with GP, OP, other specialists and employer. In addition, the GP and/or the OP of 72 employees were interviewed about the medical diagnosis and management., Results: Most employees sick listed for 12-20 weeks visited their GP and OP. According to the employees most interventions applied by the GP were medical interventions, such as referral of employees and prescription of medical drugs. Working conditions were seldom discussed by the GP and work-related interventions were never applied. Most interventions applied by the OP were work-related interventions and/or contact with the employer. The OP more often talked about working conditions and conflicts. According to the employees, the communication between GP and OP only took place in 8% of the cases. Agreement in the diagnosis, main cause of sickness absence, and obstacles in return to work reported by the GPs and OPs of the same employee was poor. In addition, similarity in reported diagnosis by GP and/or OP and the employees' scores on valid questionnaires on (mental) health was limited., Conclusions: The lack of communication and agreement by Dutch GPs and OPs in medical diagnosis and management of employees long-term sick listed due to mental health problems are indicators of sub-optimal medical treatment and return-to-work strategies.