Prevalence and predictors of return to work following a spinal cord injury using a work disability prevention approach: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Purpose: Worldwide, spinal cord injuries are associated with diminished participation in the labor market. Inconclusive reporting and differences between workplace settings for individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) make conceptualizing return to work rates among this population inherently challenging. The objectives of this study are to explore factors associated with return to work (RTW) following an SCI. Moreover, the factors were classified according to the work disability prevention framework. Finally, we conducted a meta-analysis of the prevalence of RTW following an SCI. Methods: Original articles were identified through a literature search in four health databases. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for the mapping and identification of records. Included studies contained primary studies that included the nature of the injury, antecedent factors associated with the injury, and study characteristics and RTW outcomes. Exclusion criteria for the studies included if there was no discussion of RTW outcomes, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Results: A total of 461 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and eight studies were included and assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist, Risk of Bias, and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Four studies identified personal system factors, four identified healthcare system factors, two identified compensation system factors, and one identified workplace system factors. Conclusions: Attempts to optimize RTW among persons with SCI are inherently difficult due to the diversity of this client population. Findings from the studies included in this systematic review support the utility of interventions for facilitating RTW, such as vocational rehabilitation and workplace accommodations, while simultaneously acknowledging the limitations in identifying specific interventions as facilitatory or inhibitory throughout the process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]