Preferences regarding the way of use and design of a work ability prognosis support tool: a focus group study among professionals

Abstract

Purpose: To explore the preferable way of use and design of a work ability prognosis support tool for insurance physicians (IPs) and labour experts (LEs), based on a prediction model for future changes in work ability among individuals applying for a work disability benefit. Methods: We conducted three focus groups with professionals of the Dutch Social Security Institute (17 IPs and 7 LEs). Data were audio recorded and qualitatively analysed according to the main principles of thematic analysis. Results: Clarity and ease of use were mentioned as important features of the tool. Most professionals preferred to make their own judgement during the work disability assessment interview with the claimant and afterwards verify their evaluation with the tool. Concerning preferences on the design of the tool, dividing work disability claimants into categories based on the outcome of the prediction model was experienced as the most straightforward and clear way of presenting the results. Professionals expected that this encourages them to use the tool and act accordingly. Conclusions: The tool should be easy to access and interpret, to increase the chance that professionals will use it. This way it can optimally help professionals making accurate prognoses of future changes in work ability. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONA work ability prognosis support tool based on a prediction model for changes in work ability at one-year follow-up can help occupational health professionals in making accurate prognosis of individuals applying for a work disability benefit. To be used in occupational health practice, these tools should have a simple and easy-to-use design. Graphical risk presentation can be used to provide intuitive meaning to numerical information and support users' understanding. Taking professionals' preferences into account when developing these tools encourages professionals to use the tools and act accordingly.

Use of a Decision Support Tool on Prognosis of Work Ability in Work Disability Assessments: An Experimental Study Among Insurance Physicians

“…In the present study, IPs first made their own prognosis and subsequently evaluated the decision support tool. Although this is in line with the results of a previous study, in which professionals indicated that they would first want to make their own prognosis and afterwards verify or adjust their evaluation based on the outcome of decision support tool, this might have lowered the efficacy of the tool [11]. Presenting the tool at the beginning of the decision-making process might increase its efficacy by making the tool part of this process.…”

“…a decision support tool. Based on professionals' preferences regarding the way of use and design of the tool, we developed such a tool [11]. The tool uses claimant-specific information from self-reported questionnaires and registration data from the Dutch Social Security Institute (SSI) [21].…”

“…Hence, decision support tools are not meant to take over the job of professionals, but to support them by providing objective estimates of outcome probabilities to complement their professional expertise, competencies and experience. For instance, a decision support tool based on an evidence-based prediction model for future changes in work ability could aid professionals during work disability assessments [10,11]. The tool could help professionals to make more precise estimations of future work ability and could increase their prognostic confidence [12].…”

Non-autistic employees’ perspectives on the implementation of an autism employment programme

“…We chose a qualitative method (focus groups and interviews) due to the limited prior research and our desire to obtain a richer and more in-depth view of this programme from participants’ perspective. Focus groups also allow participants to interact and build on each other’s ideas and knowledge of the programme (Louwerse et al, 2019; Riesen & Morgan, 2018). Thus, focus groups have the potential to uncover strengths, barriers and limitations to the programme implementation.…”

The perceived importance of prognostic aspects considered by physicians during work disability evaluation: a survey

“…This demand was also reported in other studies [ 26 , 30 ], which led to research providing potential search strategies, filters, or strings regarding themes such as prognosis and work participation [ 30 – 32 ]. The desire for user-friendliness, simplicity, and help in overseeing the various prognostic aspects was also identified by Kox et al [ 8 ] and Louwerse et al [ 33 ], both of whom were exploring possible prognostic tools. In contrast, when presented with possible prognostic tools, physicians also stressed the importance of preserving their professional autonomy to make unique, tailored evaluations.…”