Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 3/2019

01-09-2019

Differences Over Time in the Prognostic Effect of Return to Work Self-Efficacy on a Sustained Return to Work

Authors: Oliver Black, Malcolm R. Sim, Alexander Collie, Peter Smith

Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose This study investigated the association between return to work self-efficacy (RTW-SE) and sustained return to work (RTW) at two different time points, over a 12-month period. The primary objective of the study was to examine if the relationship between RTW-SE and a sustained RTW changed over the RTW timeline. Methods This study used survey responses from a longitudinal cohort of n = 410 workers’ compensation claimants with either an upper-body musculoskeletal injury or a psychological injury. A path analysis tested the associations between RTW-SE and a sustained RTW at two time-points. A Wald χ2 test compared nested models to determine if the association changed over time. Results RTW-SE measured at time- point 1 (T1) was associated with a sustained RTW at time-point two (T2) (β = 0.24, P < 0.05) but no association was found between RTW-SE at T2 and a sustained RTW at time-point three (T3) (β = 0.017, n.s.). Model comparisons revealed significant differences in the associations between RTW-SE and a sustained RTW, with the relationship being stronger in the early phase of RTW compared to the latter phase (χ2 = 5.002, p = 0.03). Conclusions The results indicate that RTW-SE at 4–6 months post-injury is important for a sustained RTW 6-months later although RTW-SE at 10–12 months post-injury had a negligible association over the same duration. Further research should investigate whether these findings generalize to other populations and what factors other than RTW-SE are associated with RTW in the later stages of the RTW process.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Australia SW. Key workers’ compensation information, Australia 2014. Canberra: Safe Work Australia; 2015. Australia SW. Key workers’ compensation information, Australia 2014. Canberra: Safe Work Australia; 2015.
2.
go back to reference Lane TCA, Hassani-Mahmooei B. Work-related injury and illness in Australia, 2004 to 2014. What is the incidence of work-relates conditions and their impact on time lost from work by state and territory, age, gender and injury type? Melbourne: Monash University, ISCRR; 2016. Report No.: 118-0616-R02. Lane TCA, Hassani-Mahmooei B. Work-related injury and illness in Australia, 2004 to 2014. What is the incidence of work-relates conditions and their impact on time lost from work by state and territory, age, gender and injury type? Melbourne: Monash University, ISCRR; 2016. Report No.: 118-0616-R02.
3.
go back to reference Waddell GBA. Is work good for your health and well-being? London: TSO; 2006. Waddell GBA. Is work good for your health and well-being? London: TSO; 2006.
4.
go back to reference SafeWork Australia. The cost of work-related injury and illness for Australian employers, workers and the community: 2008–09. Canberra: SafeWork Australia; 2012. SafeWork Australia. The cost of work-related injury and illness for Australian employers, workers and the community: 2008–09. Canberra: SafeWork Australia; 2012.
5.
go back to reference Safework Australia. Australian workers’ compensation statistics 2015–2016. Canberra: Safework Australia; 2017. Safework Australia. Australian workers’ compensation statistics 2015–2016. Canberra: Safework Australia; 2017.
6.
go back to reference Australia S. The incidence of accepted workers’ compensati on claims for mental stress in Australia. Canberra: Safe Work Australia; 2013. Australia S. The incidence of accepted workers’ compensati on claims for mental stress in Australia. Canberra: Safe Work Australia; 2013.
7.
go back to reference Knauf MT, Schultz IZ. Current conceptual models of return to work. In: Schultz IZ, Gatchel RJ, editors. Handbook of return to work: from research to practice. Boston: Springer; 2016. p. 27–51.CrossRef Knauf MT, Schultz IZ. Current conceptual models of return to work. In: Schultz IZ, Gatchel RJ, editors. Handbook of return to work: from research to practice. Boston: Springer; 2016. p. 27–51.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Dasinger LK, Krause N, Deegan LJ, Brand RJ, Rudolph L. Physical workplace factors and return to work after compensated low back injury: a disability phase-specific analysis. J Occup Environ Med. 2000;42(3):323–333.CrossRef Dasinger LK, Krause N, Deegan LJ, Brand RJ, Rudolph L. Physical workplace factors and return to work after compensated low back injury: a disability phase-specific analysis. J Occup Environ Med. 2000;42(3):323–333.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Krause N, Dasinger LK, Deegan LJ, Rudolph L, Brand RJ. Psychosocial job factors and return-to-work after compensated low back injury: a disability phase-specific analysis. Am J Ind Med. 2001;40(4):374–392.CrossRef Krause N, Dasinger LK, Deegan LJ, Rudolph L, Brand RJ. Psychosocial job factors and return-to-work after compensated low back injury: a disability phase-specific analysis. Am J Ind Med. 2001;40(4):374–392.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference McIntosh G, Frank J, Hogg-Johnson S, Bombardier C, Hall H. Prognostic factors for time receiving workers’ compensation benefits in a cohort of patients with low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(2):147–157.CrossRef McIntosh G, Frank J, Hogg-Johnson S, Bombardier C, Hall H. Prognostic factors for time receiving workers’ compensation benefits in a cohort of patients with low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(2):147–157.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Nastasia J, Tcaciuc R, Coutu M. Strategies for preventing prolonged disability in workers compensated for work related musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic and comprehensive literature review. Montreal: Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail; 2011. Nastasia J, Tcaciuc R, Coutu M. Strategies for preventing prolonged disability in workers compensated for work related musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic and comprehensive literature review. Montreal: Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail; 2011.
12.
go back to reference Stewart A, Polak E, Young R, Schultz I. Injured workers’ construction of expectations of return to work with sub-acute back pain: the role of perceived uncertainty. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(1):1–14.CrossRef Stewart A, Polak E, Young R, Schultz I. Injured workers’ construction of expectations of return to work with sub-acute back pain: the role of perceived uncertainty. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(1):1–14.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Fadyl J, McPherson K. Return to work after injury: a review of evidence regarding expectations and injury perceptions, and their influence on outcome. J Occup Rehabil. 2008;18(4):362–374.CrossRef Fadyl J, McPherson K. Return to work after injury: a review of evidence regarding expectations and injury perceptions, and their influence on outcome. J Occup Rehabil. 2008;18(4):362–374.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Bandura A. Self-efficacy—toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84(2):191–215.CrossRef Bandura A. Self-efficacy—toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84(2):191–215.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Black O, Keegel T, Sim MR, Collie A, Smith P. The effect of self-efficacy on return-to-work outcomes for workers with psychological or upper-body musculoskeletal injuries: a review of the literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2017;28(1):16–27CrossRef Black O, Keegel T, Sim MR, Collie A, Smith P. The effect of self-efficacy on return-to-work outcomes for workers with psychological or upper-body musculoskeletal injuries: a review of the literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2017;28(1):16–27CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Clay FJ, Berecki-Gisolf J, Collie A. How well do we report on compensation systems in studies of return to work: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24(1):111–124.CrossRef Clay FJ, Berecki-Gisolf J, Collie A. How well do we report on compensation systems in studies of return to work: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24(1):111–124.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Brouwer S, Reneman MF, Bultmann U, van der Klink JJ, Groothoff JW. A prospective study of return to work across health conditions: perceived work attitude, self-efficacy and perceived social support. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(1):104–112.CrossRef Brouwer S, Reneman MF, Bultmann U, van der Klink JJ, Groothoff JW. A prospective study of return to work across health conditions: perceived work attitude, self-efficacy and perceived social support. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(1):104–112.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Nieuwenhuijsen K, Noordik E, van Dijk FJH, van der Klink JJ. Return to work perceptions and actual return to work in workers with common mental disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23(2):290–299.CrossRef Nieuwenhuijsen K, Noordik E, van Dijk FJH, van der Klink JJ. Return to work perceptions and actual return to work in workers with common mental disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23(2):290–299.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Volker D, Zijlstra-Vlasveld M, Brouwers E, Lomwel A, Feltz-Cornelis C. Return-to-work self-efficacy and actual return to work among long-term sick-listed employees. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25(2):423–431.CrossRef Volker D, Zijlstra-Vlasveld M, Brouwers E, Lomwel A, Feltz-Cornelis C. Return-to-work self-efficacy and actual return to work among long-term sick-listed employees. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25(2):423–431.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Brouwer S, Amick BC 3rd, Lee H, Franche RL, Hogg-Johnson S. The predictive validity of the return-to-work self-efficacy scale for return-to-work outcomes in claimants with musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25(4):725–732.CrossRef Brouwer S, Amick BC 3rd, Lee H, Franche RL, Hogg-Johnson S. The predictive validity of the return-to-work self-efficacy scale for return-to-work outcomes in claimants with musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25(4):725–732.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Huijs J, Koppes LLJ, Taris TW, Blonk RWB. Differences in predictors of return to work among long-term sick-listed employees with different self-reported reasons for sick leave. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(3):301–311.CrossRef Huijs J, Koppes LLJ, Taris TW, Blonk RWB. Differences in predictors of return to work among long-term sick-listed employees with different self-reported reasons for sick leave. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(3):301–311.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Lagerveld SE, Brenninkmeijer V, Blonk RWB, Twisk J, Schaufeli WB. Predictive value of work-related self-efficacy change on RTW for employees with common mental disorders. Occup Environ Med. 2016;74(5):381–383.CrossRef Lagerveld SE, Brenninkmeijer V, Blonk RWB, Twisk J, Schaufeli WB. Predictive value of work-related self-efficacy change on RTW for employees with common mental disorders. Occup Environ Med. 2016;74(5):381–383.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Laisné F, Lecomte C, Corbière M. Biopsychosocial predictors of prognosis in musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review of the literature (corrected and republished). Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34(22):1912–1941.CrossRef Laisné F, Lecomte C, Corbière M. Biopsychosocial predictors of prognosis in musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review of the literature (corrected and republished). Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34(22):1912–1941.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Truchon M, Fillion L. Biopsychosocial determinants of chronic disability and low-back pain: a review. J Occup Rehabil. 2000;10(2):117–142.CrossRef Truchon M, Fillion L. Biopsychosocial determinants of chronic disability and low-back pain: a review. J Occup Rehabil. 2000;10(2):117–142.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Evanoff B, Dale AM, Descatha A. A conceptual model of musculoskeletal disorders for occupational health practitioners. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2014;27(1):145–148.CrossRef Evanoff B, Dale AM, Descatha A. A conceptual model of musculoskeletal disorders for occupational health practitioners. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2014;27(1):145–148.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Dimitriadis C, LaMontagne AD, Lilley R, Hogg-Johnson S, Sim M, Smith P. Cohort profile: workers’ compensation in a changing Australian labour market: the return to work (RTW) study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(11):e016366.CrossRef Dimitriadis C, LaMontagne AD, Lilley R, Hogg-Johnson S, Sim M, Smith P. Cohort profile: workers’ compensation in a changing Australian labour market: the return to work (RTW) study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(11):e016366.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Young AE, Viikari-Juntura E, Boot CRL, Chan C, de Porras DGR, Linton SJ. Workplace outcomes in work-disability prevention research: a review with recommendations for future research. J Occup Rehabil. 2016;26(4):434–447.CrossRef Young AE, Viikari-Juntura E, Boot CRL, Chan C, de Porras DGR, Linton SJ. Workplace outcomes in work-disability prevention research: a review with recommendations for future research. J Occup Rehabil. 2016;26(4):434–447.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Black O, Sim MR, Collie A, Smith P. A return-to-work self-efficacy scale for workers with psychological or musculoskeletal work-related injuries. Qual Quant. 2016;51(1):413–424.CrossRef Black O, Sim MR, Collie A, Smith P. A return-to-work self-efficacy scale for workers with psychological or musculoskeletal work-related injuries. Qual Quant. 2016;51(1):413–424.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Black O, Sim MR, Collie A, Smith P. Early-claim modifiable factors associated with return-to-work self-efficacy among workers injured at work: are there differences between psychological and musculoskeletal injuries? J Occup Environ Med. 2017;59(12):e257–e62.CrossRef Black O, Sim MR, Collie A, Smith P. Early-claim modifiable factors associated with return-to-work self-efficacy among workers injured at work: are there differences between psychological and musculoskeletal injuries? J Occup Environ Med. 2017;59(12):e257–e62.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Breaugh JA. The measurement of work autonomy. Hum Relat. 1985;38(6):551–570.CrossRef Breaugh JA. The measurement of work autonomy. Hum Relat. 1985;38(6):551–570.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user’s guide. 7th ed. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén; 1998–2012. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user’s guide. 7th ed. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén; 1998–2012.
33.
go back to reference Yu C. Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes. Los Angeles: University of California; 2002. Yu C. Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes. Los Angeles: University of California; 2002.
34.
go back to reference Cancelliere C, Donovan J, Stochkendahl MJ, Biscardi M, Ammendolia C, Myburgh C, et al. Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews. Chiropr Man Ther. 2016;24:1–23.CrossRef Cancelliere C, Donovan J, Stochkendahl MJ, Biscardi M, Ammendolia C, Myburgh C, et al. Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews. Chiropr Man Ther. 2016;24:1–23.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Brouwer S, Franche RL, Hogg-Johnson S, Lee H, Krause N, Shaw WS. Return-to-work self-efficacy: development and validation of a scale in claimants with musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):244–258.CrossRef Brouwer S, Franche RL, Hogg-Johnson S, Lee H, Krause N, Shaw WS. Return-to-work self-efficacy: development and validation of a scale in claimants with musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):244–258.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Differences Over Time in the Prognostic Effect of Return to Work Self-Efficacy on a Sustained Return to Work
Authors
Oliver Black
Malcolm R. Sim
Alexander Collie
Peter Smith
Publication date
01-09-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 1053-0487
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3688
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-09824-z

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 3/2019 Go to the issue