Toronto • May 28-29, 2010 • Student Day and Workshops: May 27
Paper: A collaborative early intervention model supporting return to work for healthcare workers
Download Presentation PDF:
Session : 9. Sustainable RTW (2/3)
Day/Time: Friday at 15:15
Room: St. Patrick Room, 3rd Floor
Objectives:
This study investigated two different models focusing on early access to physiotherapy services. Return-to-work outcomes were improved by; (1) decreasing duration of time loss acute MSIs by returning injured employees to their regular duties earlier; (2) decreasing costs associated with lengthy absences from work and; (3) assisting in the promotion of a culture that supports connection to the workplace while recovering from injury through the use of early intervention services.
Methods:
This quasi-experimental study compared RTW outcomes associated with duration, costs and durability for each of the three treatment groups. Means for duration and costs were analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVAs) and durability was measured using the Chi-Square test of associations. It was hypothesized that the PEARS Plus model would perform better than the PEARS model and the PEARS model would perform better than the non-intervention group (Stream 1 Physiotherapy) on all accounts. There were a total of 289 participants, who met the study criteria and chose to participate. Of those participants, 244 claims had STD duration and STD claims cost. All participants were employees of Fraser Health Authority and actively working within the hospital or community delivering healthcare services. All data was collected over a one year period from May 1, 2007 to April 30, 2008 and data was given an additional 6-month maturation period prior to analyzing.
Results:
It was demonstrated that the duration of a PEARS Plus (RG 1) claim was statistically lower, M = 40.84 when compared to PEARS (RG2), M =67.60 and Stream 1 Physiotherapy (RG3), M =74.29. There was statistical difference in claims costs for PEARS Plus (RG1), M = $ 4081 when compared to PEARS (RG2), M = $8223 and Stream 1 Physiotherapy (RG3), M = $8307. Both outcomes support the hypotheses that duration and claims costs would be lower in PEARS Plus (RG1) when compared to the other two treatment groups. There were insufficient claims to reliably assess durability.
Conclusions:
This pilot study investigated if the use of an off-site model, that was closely connected to the workplace and WorkSafeBC (the insurer), would be a viable option when compared against its on-site predecessor, PEARS. This research has demonstrated that access to supportive resources such as physiotherapy in conjunction with modified work or transitional duties programs have shown to be effective in facilitating return to work for temporarily and permanently disabled workers. The PEARS Plus (RG1) model demonstrated that it was an effective and sustainable way of delivering early intervention services and in the end performed statistically better than its predecessor.
References:
1. Badii, M., Keen, D., Yu, S., & Yassi, A. (2006). Evaluation of a comprehensive integrated workplace-based program to reduce occupational musculoskeletal injury and its associated morbidity in a large hospital. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 48(11), pp1159-1165.
2. Cooper, J., Tate, R., Yassi, A., & Khokhar, J. (1996). Effect of an early intervention program on the relationship between subjective pain and disability measures in nurses with low back injury. Spine, 21(20), pp 2329-2336.
3. Davis, P. M., Badii, M., & Yassi, A. (2004). Preventing disability from occupational musculoskeletal injuries in an urban, acute, and tertiary care hospital: Results from a prevention and early active return-to-work safely program. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 46(12), pp 1253-1262.
4. Franche, R. L., Baril, R., Shaw, W., Nicholas, M., & Loisel, P. (2005). Workplace-based return to work interventions: Optimizing the role of stakeholders in implementation and research. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15(4), pp 525-542.
5. Franche, R. L., Cullen, K., Clarke, J., Irvin, E., Sinclair, S., Frank, J., & the Institute for Work & Health (IWH) Workplace-Based RTW Intervention Literature Review Research Team. (2005). Workplace-based return-to-work interventions: A systematic review of the quantitative literature. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15(4), pp 607-631.
6. Franche, R., Severin, C. N. M. H. S., HoggJohnson, S., Cote, P., Vidmar, M., & Lee, H. (2007). The impact of early workplace-based return-to-work strategies on work absence duration: A 6-month longitudinal study following an occupational musculoskeletal injury. Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 49(9), 960-974.
7. Frank, J., Sinclair, S., Hogg-Johnson, S., Shannon, H., Bombardier, C., Beaton, D., & Cole, D. (1998). Preventing disability form work-related low-back pain: New evidence gives new hope – if we can just get all the players onside. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 158(12), pp 1625-1631.
8. Harder, H. G. (2003). Early Intervention in disability management: factors that influence successful return to work. International Journal of Disability, Community and Rehabilitation 2(2): 1-8.
9. Harder, H. G. & Scott, L. R. (2005). Comprehensive Disability Management. Elsevier Science Limited. Philadelphia, USA.
10. Kosny, A., Franche, R. L., Pole, J., Krause, N., Cote, P., & Mustard, C. (2006). Early healthcare provider communication with patients and their workplace following a lost-time claim for an occupational musculoskeletal injury. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 16(1), pp 27-39.
11. Loisel, Patrick; Abenhaim, Lucien; Durand, Pierre; Esdaile, John M.; Suissa, Samy; Gosselin, Lise; Simard, Robert; Turcotte, Jean; Lemaire, Jacques (1997). A Population-Based, Randomized Clinical Trial on Back Pain Management. Spine, Volume 22 - Issue 24 - pp 2911-2918
12. Loisel, P., Durand, P. et coll., Management of occupational back pain: the Sherbrooke model. Results of a pilot and feasibility study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 51, 1994.
13. Staal, J. B., Rainville, J., Fritz, J., van Mechelen, W., & Pransky, G. (2005). Physical exercise interventions to improve disability and return to work in low back pain: Current insights and opportunities for improvement. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15(4), pp 491-505.
14. Tate, R. B., Yassi, A., & Cooper, J. (1999). Predictors of time loss after back injury in nurses. Spine. 24(18), pp 1930-1941.
