It Pays to be Nice: Employer-Worker Relationships and the Management of Back Pain Claims

Butler, Richard; Johnson, William G.; Côté, Pierre

doi:10.1097/jom.0b013e318032211d

Cited by 25 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One involves the adversarial form that litigation often assumes, a process that may, ironically and iatrogenically, end up augmenting disability (Atlas et al 2006). In addition, legal entanglements involving antagonistic and uncooperative employers (from the perspective of the claimant) may make winning a case a highpriority mechanism for validating an injury (Butler et al 2007;Teasell 2001). In the current study, eight out of ten claimants who sought legal representation due to dissatisfaction with medical care also reported dissatisfaction with their employers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Legal Representation and Dissatisfaction with Workers’ Compensation: Implications for Claimant Adjustment

Chibnall

Tait

2010

Psychol. Inj. and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined relationships between attorney retention and adjustment outcomes for Workers' Compensation low back claimants at post-settlement (N= 1,464; 21 months post-claim settlement) and long-term follow-up (N =371; 72 months post-claim settlement). Claimants were classified into three groups: those who had not retained an attorney (no attorney group, 15%); those who had retained an attorney, but for reasons other than dissatisfaction with Workers' Compensation medical treatment (attorney group, 31%); and those who had retained an attorney specifically because of dissatisfaction with Workers' Compensation medical treatment (dissatisfied/attorney group, 54%). Groups were compared on demographic characteristics, Workers' Compensation variables, and adjustment indicators of pain intensity, painrelated disability, general physical and mental health status, and pain catastrophizing. Relative to the no attorney and attorney groups, claimants in the dissatisfied/attorney group were younger, had longer time to settlement, and reported greater post-settlement socioeconomic stress and catastrophizing. At long-term follow-up, the dissatisfied/attorney group reported higher levels of disability and catastrophizing, as well as lower levels of mental health status, relative to the other groups. The results suggest that attorney retention that is motivated by dissatisfaction with Workers' Compensation medical care is a significant risk factor for poor adjustment, not only in the intermediate time frame following claim settlement, but also over the long term. Findings are discussed in the context of "perceived injustice" in the Workers' Compensation system and the mechanisms by which dissatisfaction and attorney retention may impact adjustment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Legal Representation and Dissatisfaction with Workers’ Compensation: Implications for Claimant Adjustment

Chibnall

Tait

2010

Psychol. Inj. and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Poor outcomes for occupational back pain have been demonstrated in many ways, including analyses of administrative databases [4–7], clinical adjustment (e.g., pain severity and disability) [8,9], and socioeconomic outcomes (e.g., financial hardship, residential dislocation, marital instability, and health care utilization) [10–14]. Although the mechanisms to account for these outcomes are not entirely clear [15], numerous factors appear to contribute: characteristics of the injury [5,7,9,16]; features of the workplace [17–20]; aspects of the Workers' Compensation (WC) system [3,7,21–23]; litigation status [16,24–26]; socio‐demographic factors [3,8,27]; and psychosocial factors [9,20,28–32].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-Term Adjustment to Work-Related Low Back Pain: Associations with Socio-demographics, Claim Processes, and Post-Settlement Adjustment

Chibnall

Tait

2009

Pain Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Trajectory analysis can be done with rather small data samples. Similarly, RTW patterns have been examined in investigations focusing on recurrence of work disability [33, 83, 84] and patterns of employment following a work-related health condition [85, 86]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research: A Review with Recommendations for Future Research

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Outcome assessment is a central issue in work disability prevention research. The goal of this paper was to (1) ascertain the most salient workplace outcomes; (2) evaluate the congruence between business and science perspectives; (3) illustrate new perspectives on assessing longitudinal outcomes; and (4) provide recommendations for advancing outcome evaluation in this area of research. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration that culminated in a sponsored 3-day conference, “Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability”, held October 14–16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience. Results Numerous workplace work-disability prevention outcome measures were identified. Analysis indicated that their applicability varied depending on the type of work disability the worker was experiencing. For those who were working, but with health-related work limitations (Type 1), predominant outcomes were measures of productivity, presenteeism, and work-related limitations. For those who were off work due to a health condition (Type 2), predominant outcomes were measures of time off work, supervisor/employee interactions, and return-to-work (RTW) preparation. For those who had returned to work (Type 3), predominant outcomes were measures of presenteeism, time until RTW, percentage of work resumption, employment characteristics, stigma, work engagement, co-worker interactions, and sustained or durable RTW. For those who had withdrawn from the labor force (Type 4), predominant outcomes were cost and vocational status. Discussion Currently available measures provide a good basis to use more consistent outcomes in disability prevention in the future. The research area would also benefit from more involvement of employers as stakeholders, and multilevel conceptualizations of disability outcomes.

show abstract

It Pays to be Nice: Employer-Worker Relationships and the Management of Back Pain Claims

Abstract: Workers' RTW is more responsive to their satisfaction with how the firm treated their disability claim than with their satisfaction with the health care provider. Satisfaction of both types plays an important role in determining RTW.

Cited by 25 publications

References 26 publications

Legal Representation and Dissatisfaction with Workers’ Compensation: Implications for Claimant Adjustment

Legal Representation and Dissatisfaction with Workers’ Compensation: Implications for Claimant Adjustment

Long-Term Adjustment to Work-Related Low Back Pain: Associations with Socio-demographics, Claim Processes, and Post-Settlement Adjustment

Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research: A Review with Recommendations for Future Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About