An exploration of alternative methods for assessing return-to-work success following occupational injury

Abstract

Purpose: To explore alternative methods for assessing return-to-work success. Method: This exploratory study employed a prospective design. Participants (N = 150) were all vocational rehabilitation recipients who sustained a work-related injury that resulted in them being off work for at least 6 months, and were unable to return to their pre-injury position. At baseline (B), all were reported to have found post-injury employment. Qualitative features of the participants’ post-injury employment were assessed at the time of initial interview (T1), which was conducted a mean of approximately one year following the participants’ scheduled workplace re-entry (mean 344 days). Participants’ T1 employment characteristics were then compared to their outcomes at the time of follow-up (T2), which was approximately 3 months later (mean 85 days). Results: Findings indicate that 25% of participants were not in their baseline jobs at the time of last contact; some were in different jobs, however others were not working. At T1 many of those working reported experiencing difficulties. Comparisons revealed significant relationships between problem indicators at T1 and employment outcomes at T2, with significant problem indicators including worries that symptoms might interfere with their ability to continue in the job, difficulties with the job’s physical demands and a strong desire to leave their current job. When problem indicators were used in combination, stronger relationships were observed and self-assessed performance contributed to the effect. Conclusions: Results add support to the contention that rather than a single event, RTW is an evolving, complex and sometimes nonlinear process. This should be kept in mind when assessing the success of an injured worker’s RTW.

Implications for Rehabilitation

• Alternative methods for assessing RTW success were explored.

• These focused on capturing the evolution of the RTW, its qualitative features and its potential for longer-term success.

• Results add support to the idea that rather than a single event, RTW is an evolving, complex and sometimes nonlinear process.

• Injury
• outcomes
• vocational rehabilitation

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledges the following people for their contributions to this project: MaryJane Woiszwillo, Rebecca Shayne, Andrea Blakemore, Amy Vercillo, Robert Dometrio, Glenn Pransky, and of course, those who agreed to share their stories.