Limitations to Work-Related Functioning of People with Persistent “Medically Unexplained” Physical Symptoms: A Modified Delphi Study Among Physicians

Weerdesteijn, Kristel H. N.; Schaafsma, Frederieke; Beek, Allard J. van der; Anema, J.R.

doi:10.1007/s10926-016-9674-x

Cited by 9 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The nominal group technique was used to structure the meeting to explore differences between individual labour experts and caseworkers in their opinion about RTW barriers and interventions and to reach consensus among the participants by group discussions [ 13 ]. Earlier studies have successfully used the combination of the Delphi technique and nominal group technique [ 14 , 15 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Return to work factors and vocational rehabilitation interventions for long-term, partially disabled workers: a modified Delphi study among vocational rehabilitation professionals

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Long-term disability has a great impact on both society and workers with disabilities. Little is known about the barriers which prohibit workers with long-term disabilities from returning to work and which interventions are best suited to counteract these barriers. The main purpose of this study was to obtain consensus among professionals on important return to work (RTW) factors and effective vocational rehabilitation (VR) interventions for long-term (> 2 years), partially disabled workers. Our three research questions were: (1) which factors are associated with RTW for long-term disabled workers?; (2) which factors associated with RTW can be targeted by VR interventions?; and (3) which VR interventions are the most effective to target these factors? Methods A modified Delphi Study was conducted using a panel of 22 labour experts, caseworkers, and insurance physicians. The study consisted of several rounds of questionnaires and one online meeting. Results The multidisciplinary panel reached consensus that 58 out of 67 factors were important for RTW and that 35 of these factors could be targeted using VR interventions. In five rounds, the expert panel reached consensus that 11 out of 22 VR interventions were effective for at least one of the eight most important RTW factors. Conclusions Consensus was reached among the expert panel that many factors that are important for the RTW of short-term disabled workers are also important for the RTW of long-term partially disabled workers and that a substantial number of these factors could effectively be targeted using VR interventions. The results of this study will be used to develop a decision aid that supports vocational rehabilitation professionals in profiling clients and in choosing suitable VR interventions.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Return to work factors and vocational rehabilitation interventions for long-term, partially disabled workers: a modified Delphi study among vocational rehabilitation professionals

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, in different countries the concept is assessed differently [2]; various methods are used to aid in assessment, the most common being clinical tests, functional capacity evaluations, and psychological tests. Second, high inter-doctor disagreements have been found on the outcome of assessing inability to work fulltime, questioning the credibility of the current assessment procedures [4][5][6]. In a previous study we found that, although 10 out of 13 countries use formal rules to assess inability to work, in the Netherlands only a professional guideline is used [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Exploring the concept inability to work fulltime in the context of work disability assessments: a qualitative study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In many countries inability to work fulltime is recognized as an important concept in work disability assessments. However, consensus is lacking regarding the concept and how it should be assessed. This study seeks to conceptualize and operationalize the concept of inability to work fulltime, and includes perspectives of both patients and physicians. Research questions involve identifying: 1. key elements, 2. measurable indicators, and 3. valid methods for assessing indicators of inability to work fulltime. Methods We used a qualitative study with a thematic content analysis design to conceptualize inability to work fulltime, based on nineteen semi-structured interviews conducted among insurance and occupational health physicians, and representatives of patient organizations. Results Inability to work fulltime is conceptualized as a complex concept which is strongly individually determined and variable due to time and underlying disease. Key dimensions of inability to work fulltime included besides the disease itself, also personal factors like psychological and lifestyle factors, as well as environmental factors related to the work situation and social context. Fatigue, cognitive impairments, and restrictions in functioning in- and outside work were reported as important measurable indicators. A combined use of self-assessment, assessment interviews, and testing, and assessment in the actual (work) setting was identified for assessing these indicators. Conclusion Taking into account the complex and variable nature of inability to work fulltime, we found it advisable to use multiple methods and multiple time points for the assessment. Results of this study provide starting points for further research on the operationalization of inability to work fulltime in a work disability context.

show abstract

“…Generally, the diagnosis is an important predictor of certified sick leave and symptom diagnoses imply shorter sick leave (Starzmann et al, 2015). Deciding the level of work-related limitations to functioning may be especially difficult for patients with symptom diagnoses and physicians are divided in their initial assessments of these patients (although research suggests the potential for reaching a broader consensus) (Weerdesteijn et al, 2017).…”

Section: Does Diagnosis Matter?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sanctioning the sick: Do perceptions of activating the sick and diagnosis matter?

Fekjær¹,

Rasmussen

Terum³

2022

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent inclusion of behavioural conditionality in health‐related benefit programmes raises questions about frontline workers' (FWs') discretionary use of sanctioning. Using an experimental vignette design in a survey of 824 FWs in the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (NAV), we investigated whether FWs' perceptions of diagnosis and sick recipients' obligations affect their propensity to sanction for non‐compliance. We find that the recipients' diagnoses did not influence FWs' propensity to sanction for non‐compliance. Recipients with a symptom diagnosis (ME/CFS) were sanctioned to the same degree as those with a diagnosis based on objective medical evidence (Bekhterev's disease). However, FWs who generally found it difficult to impose activity requirements on recipients with health‐related problems were also less prone to enact sanctions. Our results support the notion of competing approaches to activating and sanctioning the sick. FWs who agree that it is difficult to activate the sick also tend to avoid sanctioning, whereas the propensity to sanction is more widespread among those who disagree that activating the sick is difficult.

show abstract

Limitations to Work-Related Functioning of People with Persistent “Medically Unexplained” Physical Symptoms: A Modified Delphi Study Among Physicians

Cited by 9 publications

References 46 publications

Return to work factors and vocational rehabilitation interventions for long-term, partially disabled workers: a modified Delphi study among vocational rehabilitation professionals

Return to work factors and vocational rehabilitation interventions for long-term, partially disabled workers: a modified Delphi study among vocational rehabilitation professionals

Exploring the concept inability to work fulltime in the context of work disability assessments: a qualitative study

Sanctioning the sick: Do perceptions of activating the sick and diagnosis matter?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About