Exploring the meaning of early contact in return-to-work from workplace actors' perspective

References

• MacEachen E, Ferrier S, Kosny A, Chambers B. A deliberation on ‘hurt versus harm’ logic in early-return-to-work policy. Pol Pract Health Safety 2007;5(2):41–62.
   Google Scholar
• Kuoppala J, Lamminpaa A. Rehabilitation and work ability: a systematic literature review. J Rehabil Med 2008;40:796–804.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franche RL, Cullen K, Clarke J, Irvin E, Sinclair S, Frank J. Workplace-based return-to-work interventions: a systematic review of the quantitative literature. J Occupat Rehabil 2005;15:607–631.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WorkCover. Guidelines for employers’ return-to-work programs. New South Wales: Australia. WorkCover Publ; 2003. 1–40.
   Google Scholar
• Employers: what are my responsibilities? [database on the Internet]. Ontario, Canada: WSIB [cited 17 November 2009]. Electronic Citation. http://www.wsib.on.ca/wsib/wsibsite.nsf/public/EmployersESRWEmployers. Last accessed 17 November 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Försäkringskassan. Tidiga arbetsgivarinsatser under sjukperioden. Sweden: Försäkringskassan; 2009. 1–2.
   Google Scholar
• NHS. Long-term sickness absence and incapacity for work. UK: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2009. pp 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Shrey DE. Disability management in industry: the new paradigm in injured worker rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 1996;18:408–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams RM, Westmorland M. Perspectives on workplace disability management: a review of the literature. Work 2002;19:87–93.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Abenhaim L, Rossignol M, Valat JP, Nordin M, Avouac B, Blotman F, Charlot J, Dreiser RL, Legrand E, Rozenberg S, Vautravers. The role of activity in the therapeutic management of back pain: report of the International Paris Task Force on Back Pain. Spine 2000;25(4 suppl):1S–33S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shrey DE, Lacerte M, editors. Principles and practices of disability management in industry. Winter Park, FL: GR Press; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Shrey DE. Worksite disability management model for effective return-to-work planning. Occupat Med 2000;15:789–801.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brooker AS, Cole DC, Hogg-Johnson S, Smith J, Frank JW. Modified work: prevalence and characteristics in a sample of workers with soft-tissue injuries. J Occupat Environ Med 2001;43:276–284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler RJ, Johnson WG, Gray BP. Timing makes a difference: early nurse case management intervention and low back pain. Professional Case Management 2007;12:316–327; quiz 28–29.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Holmgren K, Dahlin Ivanoff S. Women on sickness absence – views of possibilities and obstacles for returning to work. A focus group study. Disabil Rehabil 2004;26:213–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordqvist C, Holmqvist C, Alexanderson K. Views of laypersons on the role employers play in return to work when sick-listed. J Occupat Rehabil 2003;13:11–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baril R, Clarke J, Friesen M, Stock S, Cole D. Management of return-to-work programs for workers with musculoskeletal disorders: a qualitative study in three Canadian provinces. Soc Sci Med 2003;57:2101–2114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eakin JM, MacEachen E, Clarke J. ‘Playing it smart’ with return-to-work: small workplace experience under Ontario's policy of self-reliance and early return. Pol Pract Health Safety 2003;1:19–42.
   Google Scholar
• Shaw WS, Robertson MM, Pransky G, McLellan RK. Employee perspectives on the role of supervisors to prevent workplace disability after injuries. J Occupat Rehabil 2003;13:129–142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacEachen E, Clarke J, Franche RL, Irvin E. Systematic review of the qualitative literature on return to work after injury. Scand J Work Environ Health 2006;32:257–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. London: Sage; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Tjulin A, MacEachen E, Ekberg K. Exploring workplace actors experiences of the social organization of return-to-work. J Occupat Rehabil 2009; doi:10.1007/s10926-009-9209-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 1962:381. Lagen om allmän försäkring. Stockholm: Regeringskansliet; 1962.
   Google Scholar
• Hogan B, Carrasco AJ, Wellman B. Visualizing personal networks: working with participant-aided sociograms. Field Methods 2007;19:116–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lysaght RM, Larmour-Trode S. An exploration of social support as a factor in the return-to-work process. Work 2008;30:255–266.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Holmgren K, Dahlin Ivanoff S. Supervisors' views on employer responsibility in the return to work process. A focus group study. J Occupat Rehabil 2007;17:93–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• House JS, Umberson D, Landis KR. Structures and processes of social support. Ann Rev Sociol 1988;14:293–318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark SC. Work/family border theory: a new theory of work/family balance. Hum Relat 2000;53:747–770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schultz IZ, Stowell AW, Feuerstein M, Gatchel RJ. Models of return to work for musculoskeletal disorders. J Occupat Rehabil 2007;17:327–352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar