IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/camsys/v8y2012i1pi-155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Workplace Disability Management Programs Promoting Return to Work: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Ulrik Gensby
  • Thomas Lund
  • Krystyna Kowalski
  • Madina Saidj
  • Anne‐Marie Klint Jørgensen
  • Trine Filges
  • Emma Irvin
  • Benjamin C. Amick
  • Merete Labriola

Abstract

This Campbell systematic review assesses the effectiveness of workplace disability management programs (‘WPDM’) in promoting return to work. The review summarises findings from 13 studies, eight conducted in the USA and five in Canada. Participants were employees on sick leave, from the private and public sectors, with an inability to work due to physical injury, illness or mental disorders. WPDM programmes typically comprise multiple components, such as early and considerate contact, modified/tailored work schedule or duties, a revision of workplace roles, education of workplace staff, and rehabilitation activities. Programmes typically involved an inter‐disciplinary team of competences from several corporate located key parties such as: occupational physicians and physiotherapists, occupational therapist/ergonomists, case managers/return‐to work (‘RTW’) coordinators, union representatives, supervisors, and managerial HR staff. A RTW policy was used to describe procedures, and stakeholder engagement with roles and responsibilities written into the policy. A joint labour‐management committee may serve as a vehicle for developing consensus among key decision makers in the design, implementation and evaluation of each component, and inclusion of senior management may drive corporate support and commitment. The available evidence was not suitable for quantitative synthesis, so no overall conclusion on the effectiveness of WPDM programmes can be made. It cannot be determined if specific program components or specific sets of components are driving effectiveness. The majority of studies programs focused on musculoskeletal disorders during the off work/pre‐return phase of the RTW process. There is little evidence regarding programmes targeting mental health conditions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents a Campbell systematic review on the effectiveness of workplace disability management programs (WPDM programs) promoting return to work (RTW), as implemented and practised by employers. The objectives of this review were to assess the effects of WPDM programs, to examine components or combination of components, which appear more highly related to positive RTW outcomes, and get an understanding of the research area to assess needed research. Twelve databases were searched for peer‐reviewed studies published between 1948 to July 2010 on WPDM programs provided by the employer to re‐entering employees with injuries or illnesses (occupational or non‐occupational). Screening of articles, risk of bias assessment and data extraction were conducted in pairs of reviewers. A total of 16,932 records were identified by the initial search. Of these 599 papers were assessed for relevance. Thirteen studies (two non‐randomized studies (NRS) and eleven single group ‘before and after’ studies (B&A), including eleven different WPDM programs, met the inclusion criteria. There were insufficient data on the characteristics of the sample and the effect sizes were uncertain. However, narrative descriptions of the included program characteristics were rich, and provide valuable insights into program scope, components, procedures and human resources involved. There is a lack of evidence to draw unambiguous conclusions on the effectiveness of employer provided WPDM programs promoting RTW. Thus we could not determine if specific program components or specific sets of components are driving effectiveness. The review adds to the exiting knowledge base on WPDM program development, characteristics and evaluation. As an organizational level intervention employer provided WPDM programs are multi‐component offering a suite of policies and practices for injured or ill employees. The review identified 15 constituent program components, covering individual, organizational, and system level policies and practices, depicting key human resources involved in workplace program procedures and administration. The majority of WPDM programs were targeted musculoskeletal disorders, during the off‐work and pre‐return phase of the RTW process, with only little evidence on WPDM programs targeting mental health conditions and post return/stay at work. Future program evaluations ought to broaden their focus beyond the first phases of the RTW process and incorporate sustainable outcomes (e.g. job retention, satisfactory and productive job performance, work role functioning, and maintenance of job function). Given the lack of WPDM programs evaluated in peer‐reviewed publications, more attention needs to be given to locate and evaluate efforts from company studies that may still exist outside the peer reviewed published literature. Thus, researchers following this track need to consider if these studies, when located have adequate study designs. While many employers recognize the importance of WPDM and are adopting policies and practices to promote RTW, judging from this review, the existing evidence leaves room for more rigorous methodological studies to develop the present WPDM knowledge base. Prospectively WPDM evaluation research also needs to enlarge its perspective and analytic tools to examine information that is meaningful and cost effective to those who will benefit from it to further advance the field. The review findings might help explicate WPDM programs and its potential impact on RTW outcomes, and provide a more complete understanding of the research in the field of WPDM. This may inspire researchers, employers, and policy makers, who are interested not only in questions regarding the impact of programs, but also their nature, to promote future design and evaluation of DM in organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ulrik Gensby & Thomas Lund & Krystyna Kowalski & Madina Saidj & Anne‐Marie Klint Jørgensen & Trine Filges & Emma Irvin & Benjamin C. Amick & Merete Labriola, 2012. "Workplace Disability Management Programs Promoting Return to Work: A Systematic Review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages -155.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:camsys:v:8:y:2012:i:1:p:i-155
    DOI: 10.4073/csr.2012.17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2012.17
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4073/csr.2012.17?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. H. Allan Hunt & Rochelle Virginia Habeck, 1994. "The Michigan Disability Prevention Study: Research Highlights," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: The Encyclopedia of Education, Second Edition, pages I-114 - I, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rubendri Govender & Deshini Naidoo & Pragashnie Govender, 2019. "Return to Work following Ill Health or Disability in a Public-Private Health Care Facility: A Study in South Africa," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(9), pages 170-170, August.
    2. Janice Tripney & Alan Roulstone & Carol Vigurs & Michele Moore & Elena Schmidt & Ruth Stewart, 2013. "Protocol for a Systematic Review: Interventions to Improve the Labour Market Situation of Adults with Physical and/or Sensory Disabilities in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 1-65.
    3. Xanthe Hunt & Ashrita Saran & Lena Morgon Banks & Howard White & Hannah Kuper, 2021. "PROTOCOL: Effectiveness of interventions for improving livelihood outcomes for people with disabilities in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), September.
    4. Elizabeth Shaw & Michael Nunns & Stuart G. Spicer & Hassanat Lawal & Simon Briscoe & G. J. Melendez‐Torres & Ruth Garside & Kristin Liabo & Jo Thompson Coon, 2024. "What is the volume, quality and characteristics of evidence relating to the effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of multi‐disciplinary occupational health interventions aiming to improve work‐related ," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), June.
    5. Janice Tripney & Alan Roulstone & Carol Vigurs & Nina Hogrebe & Elena Schmidt & Ruth Stewart, 2015. "Interventions to Improve the Labour Market Situation of Adults with Physical and/or Sensory Disabilities in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries: A Systematic Review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 1-127.
    6. Ashrita Saran & Howard White & Hannah Kuper, 2020. "Evidence and gap map of studies assessing the effectiveness of interventions for people with disabilities in low‐and middle‐income countries," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), March.
    7. Rainer Eppel & Thomas Leoni & Helmut Mahringer, 2016. "Österreich 2025 – Gesundheit und Beschäftigungsfähigkeit. Status quo und Reformperspektiven," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 89(11), pages 785-798, November.
    8. Xanthe Hunt & Ashrita Saran & Lena Morgon Banks & Howard White & Hannah Kuper, 2022. "Effectiveness of interventions for improving livelihood outcomes for people with disabilities in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), September.
    9. Derbyshire, Daniel W. & Jeanes, Emma & Khedmati Morasae, Esmaeil & Reh, Susan & Rogers, Morwenna, 2024. "Employer-focused interventions targeting disability employment: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 347(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pablo Arocena & Imanol Núñez & Mikel Villanueva, 2007. "El Impacto de la Gestión Activa en la Performance de los Fondos de Inversión de Renta Fija," Working Papers 0703, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Jan 2007.
    2. Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2010. "An Inquiry Into The Theory, Causes And Consequences Of Monitoring Indicators Of Health And Safety At Work," SIRE Discussion Papers 2010-120, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    3. Hogelund, Jan & Holm, Anders, 2006. "Case management interviews and the return to work of disabled employees," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 500-519, May.
    4. Ulrik Gensby & Thomas Lund & Krystyna Kowalski & Madina Saidj & Anne‐Marie Klint Jørgensen & Trine Filges & Ben. C. Amick & Merete Labriola, 2011. "PROTOCOL: Workplace Disability Management Programs Promoting Return‐to‐Work (RTW)," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(1), pages 1-56.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:camsys:v:8:y:2012:i:1:p:i-155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1891-1803 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.