BackgroundRecent research has suggested that interventions at the workplace might be the most potent ingredient in return to work interventions, but few studies have investigated the different effects of workplace interventions as part of occupational rehabilitation programs. The comprehensive design described in this article includes effect (on return to work and health outcomes), and health economic evaluations of a workplace intervention added to a multicomponent rehabilitation program. Qualitative and mixed method studies will investigate sick-listed persons’, rehabilitation therapists’ and employers’ perspectives on the usability and outcomes of the rehabilitation program and the workplace intervention. The program and intervention are provided to patients with musculoskeletal, psychological or general and unspecified diagnoses. The program is multi-component and includes Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, physical exercise, patient education and creating a plan for increased work participation.MethodsPersons who are employed, aged from 18 to 60 years, with a current sick leave status of 50% or more and a diagnosis within the musculoskeletal, psychological or general and unspecified chapters of International Classification of Primary Care-2 (ICPC-2) will be recruited to a researcher-blinded parallel-group randomized controlled trial. All participants take part in an in-patient occupational rehabilitation program, while the intervention group also takes part in an intervention at the workplace. The effect and economic evaluation will investigate the effect of the added workplace intervention. The primary outcome measures will be time until full sustainable return to work and total number of sickness absence days in the 12 months after inclusion. Health economic evaluations will investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility. Qualitative studies will investigate rehabilitation therapists’ experiences with working towards return to work within an ACT-approach and stakeholders’ experiences with the workplace intervention. A mixed methods study will combine quantitative and qualitative findings on the participants’ expectations and motivation for return to work.DiscussionThe outline of this comprehensive study could represent an important addition to the standard designs of return to work evaluation. The mixed methods design, with qualitative approaches as well as a rigorous randomized controlled trial, might prove useful to shed light on contextual factors.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02541890. September 4, 2015.

BackgroundFacilitating return to work can be challenging due to the complexity of work disability. Few studies have examined rehabilitation programs based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy that intend to support return to work, and none have investigated therapists’ experience with providing such programs. The aim of this study was therefore to explore therapists’ experience of addressing the return to work process in an inpatient occupational rehabilitation program based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.MethodsThis was a qualitative interview study supported by participant observation. Therapists were interviewed regarding their experiences with addressing return to work in an inpatient occupational rehabilitation program based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. In addition, the rehabilitation program was investigated through participant observation. The interviews were analysed according to Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis and informed by an analysis of field notes from the participant observation.ResultsAcceptance and Commitment Therapy was experienced as a meaningful approach to facilitate return to work, as it allowed therapists to address all relevant aspects of the individual participant’s life that might influence work participation. The therapists’ twofold goal was to support participants in building both a meaningful life and sustainable work participation. To do so, they attempted to instil long-term and interrelated processes concerning ownership, causes of sick leave, relation to expectations, the values of work, and the scope of agency.ConclusionUnfolding values connected to work participation might reconcile the tension between work and family life by integrating work with other areas of life. Providing work participation with personal meaning also seems especially commensurable with a context where economy presents a poor incentive for return to work. Therapists should, however, be attentive to the need to secure the prominence of return to work by relating participants’ chosen themes explicitly to their return to work process. Therapists should also be aware of the dilemma that may arise when they attempt to refrain from providing advice while simultaneously encouraging actions they consider appropriate to facilitate sustainable work participation. In addition, having an individual-oriented approach to occupational rehabilitation may obscure the extent to which return to work is a multi-stakeholder process.

Purpose: Although it is believed that involving the workplace and stakeholders in return-towork interventions is beneficial, Norwegian occupational rehabilitation programmes rarely do. During 2015-2016, Hysnes Rehabilitation Centre provided inpatient multimodal occupational rehabilitation, including workplace meetings with employees, supervisors, and rehabilitation therapists. This study aims to explore the meetings´ content and stakeholders´ experiences. Methods: This was a multiple case study including non-participant observation of workplace meetings and interviews with participants Results: Essential features of meetings included revealing and aligning the employee's and supervisor's understandings. Three components seemed instrumental in developing shared understandings leading to appropriate adjustments: 1) disclosing causes of absence, 2) validating difficulties, attitudes, and efforts, and 3) delimiting responsibility. Therapists played a vital role in addressing these components, supporting employees, and ensuring planning of appropriate solutions. Conclusion:Developing shared understandings by addressing and aligning illness-and return-towork representations appears important for return-to-work interventions. Although pivotal to developing appropriate adjustments, disclosure depends upon supervisors' display of understanding and should not be encouraged without knowledge of the employee´s work situation. How supervisors relate to employees and implement adjustments may be as important as the types of adjustments. The therapist's support and validation of employees in vulnerable situations also seem valuable. Trial registration:The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02541890), 4 September 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02541890.

Background We have developed a clinical decision support system (CDSS) based on methods from artificial intelligence to support physiotherapists and patients in the decision-making process of managing musculoskeletal (MSK) pain disorders in primary care. The CDSS finds the most similar successful patients from the past to give treatment recommendations for a new patient. Using previous similar patients with successful outcomes to advise treatment moves management of MSK pain patients from one-size fits all recommendations to more individually tailored treatment. This study aimed to describe the development and explore the acceptance and use of the CDSS for MSK pain patients.Methods This mixed-methods study was carried out in the Norwegian physiotherapy primary healthcare sector between October and November 2020, ahead of a randomised controlled trial. We included four physiotherapists and three of their patients, in total 12 patients, with musculoskeletal pain in the neck, shoulder, back, hip, knee or complex pain. We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with all participants. The interviews were analysed using the Framework Method. In addition, physiotherapists answered the 10-item System Usability Scale.Results Overall, both the physiotherapists and patients found the system acceptable and usable. Important findings from the analysis of the interviews were that the CDSS was valued as a preparatory and exploratory tool, facilitating the therapeutic relationship. However, the physiotherapists used the system mainly to support their previous and current practice rather than involving patients to a greater extent in decisions and learning from previous successful patients.Conclusions The CDSS was acceptable and usable to both the patients and physiotherapists. However, the system appeared not to considerably influence the physiotherapists' clinical reasoning and choice of treatment based on information from most similar successful patients. This could be due to a smaller than optimal number of previous patients in the CDSS or insufficient clinical implementation. Extensive training of physiotherapists should not be underestimated to build understanding and trust in CDSSs.

Background Supervisors play a pivotal role in the sick leave process. Although responsibility for sick leave and return to work follow-up is increasingly placed on the workplace in Norway, few studies have explored supervisors’ experiences. This study aims to explore supervisors´ experiences with attending to employees’ sick leave and return to work process. Methods This study consists of individual interviews with 11 supervisors from diverse workplaces that was analysed thematically. Results The supervisors emphasised the value of presence at the workplace, the need for them to obtain information and uphold dialogue, considering individual and environmental influences on return-to-work and allocating responsibility. Investing time and money was crucial to prevent or reduce the negative impact of sick leave. Conclusions The supervisors’ perception of attending to sick leave and return-to-work largely reflect Norwegian legislation. However, they find obtaining information and managing responsibility challenging, suggesting that their responsibilities for return-to-work are perhaps disproportionate to their knowledge on attending this process. Individualised support and guidance on how to develop accommodations based on the employee´s workability should be made available. The reciprocal nature of follow-up described also reveals how the return-to-work process is enmeshed with (inter)personal considerations possibly resulting in unequal treatment.