Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 3/2014

01-09-2014

Injured Workers’ Assessment of Vocational Rehabilitation Services Before and After Retraining

Authors: Jeanne M. Sears, Thomas M. Wickizer, Beryl A. Schulman

Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation | Issue 3/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose Workers’ compensation-based vocational rehabilitation (VR) programs are costly and challenging to operate effectively. This study aimed to: (1) describe injured workers’ assessment of Washington State’s VR system before and after vocational retraining, (2) describe the factors affecting injured worker satisfaction with VR services, and (3) gather suggestions for program improvement from injured workers. Methods Telephone surveys were conducted in two distinct samples: (1) 361 workers were interviewed after determination of retraining eligibility but before retraining plan development, and (2) 360 workers were interviewed after cessation of vocational services and claim closure. Results Injured workers interviewed before retraining were more often satisfied with the VR system (69 %) than were those interviewed after VR services ended (46 %). Although 55 % were initially somewhat/very certain they would return to work (RTW) after retraining, only 21 % had RTW 3–6 months after claim closure. Poor health, poor functional ability, and multiple retraining attempts were significantly associated with dissatisfaction. Suggestions for program improvement fell most frequently into the following areas: (1) more training choices, more worker input into the retraining goal, and/or a better fit of the retraining goal with the workers’ experience and abilities (25 %); (2) listen to, respect, and/or understand the worker with regard to their interests, goals, and limitations (17 %); and (3) more support with job placement, work re-entry skills, and RTW in general (9 %). Conclusions There is substantial room for improvement in worker satisfaction with VR. Injured workers’ feedback may facilitate identification of opportunities to improve the VR process and RTW outcomes.
Literature
1.
go back to reference MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Chambers L. The “toxic dose” of system problems: why some injured workers don’t return to work as expected. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(3):349–66.PubMedCrossRef MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Chambers L. The “toxic dose” of system problems: why some injured workers don’t return to work as expected. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(3):349–66.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Wickizer TM, Franklin G, Plaeger-Brockway R, Mootz RD. Improving the quality of workers’ compensation health care delivery: the Washington State Occupational Health Services Project. Milbank Q. 2001;79(1):5–33.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Wickizer TM, Franklin G, Plaeger-Brockway R, Mootz RD. Improving the quality of workers’ compensation health care delivery: the Washington State Occupational Health Services Project. Milbank Q. 2001;79(1):5–33.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Lippel K, Neilson C, Franche RL, et al. The ‘ability’ paradigm in vocational rehabilitation: challenges in an Ontario injured worker retraining program. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(1):105–17.PubMedCrossRef MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Lippel K, Neilson C, Franche RL, et al. The ‘ability’ paradigm in vocational rehabilitation: challenges in an Ontario injured worker retraining program. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(1):105–17.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Lippel K, Neilson C, Franche RL, et al. The ideal of consumer choice: challenges with implementation in an Ontario injured worker vocational retraining program. Disabil Rehabil. Online first: 25 April 2013. doi:10.3109/09638288.2013.771704. MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Lippel K, Neilson C, Franche RL, et al. The ideal of consumer choice: challenges with implementation in an Ontario injured worker vocational retraining program. Disabil Rehabil. Online first: 25 April 2013. doi:10.​3109/​09638288.​2013.​771704.
10.
go back to reference Sitzia J, Wood N. Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45(12):1829–43.PubMedCrossRef Sitzia J, Wood N. Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45(12):1829–43.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Wickizer TM, Franklin G, Fulton-Kehoe D, Turner JA, Mootz R, Smith-Weller T. Patient satisfaction, treatment experience, and disability outcomes in a population-based cohort of injured workers in Washington State: implications for quality improvement. Health Serv Res. 2004;39(4 Pt 1):727–48.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Wickizer TM, Franklin G, Fulton-Kehoe D, Turner JA, Mootz R, Smith-Weller T. Patient satisfaction, treatment experience, and disability outcomes in a population-based cohort of injured workers in Washington State: implications for quality improvement. Health Serv Res. 2004;39(4 Pt 1):727–48.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Pourat N, Kominski G, Roby D, Cameron M. Satisfaction with care and perceptions of quality among injured workers in California’s Workers’ Compensation system. J Occup Environ Med. 2007;49(11):1249–56.PubMedCrossRef Pourat N, Kominski G, Roby D, Cameron M. Satisfaction with care and perceptions of quality among injured workers in California’s Workers’ Compensation system. J Occup Environ Med. 2007;49(11):1249–56.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Franklin GM, Fulton-Kehoe D. Outcomes research in Washington state workers’ compensation. Am J Ind Med. 1996;29(6):642–8.PubMedCrossRef Franklin GM, Fulton-Kehoe D. Outcomes research in Washington state workers’ compensation. Am J Ind Med. 1996;29(6):642–8.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. Vocational Improvement Project Report to the Legislature: As required by RCW 51.32.099. December, 2012. Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. Vocational Improvement Project Report to the Legislature: As required by RCW 51.32.099. December, 2012.
17.
go back to reference The American Association for Public Opinion Research. Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. 5th ed. Lenexa: AAPOR; 2008. The American Association for Public Opinion Research. Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. 5th ed. Lenexa: AAPOR; 2008.
18.
go back to reference Wickizer T, Franklin G, Fulton-Kehoe D, Gluck J, Smith-Weller T, Turner J, et al. Satisfaction among Injured Workers with Health Care Delivery: Final Survey Results; Deliverable 7G. Prepared for Occupational Health Services Project, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. Seattle, WA: University of Washington; 2000. Wickizer T, Franklin G, Fulton-Kehoe D, Gluck J, Smith-Weller T, Turner J, et al. Satisfaction among Injured Workers with Health Care Delivery: Final Survey Results; Deliverable 7G. Prepared for Occupational Health Services Project, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. Seattle, WA: University of Washington; 2000.
19.
go back to reference Gilmore Research Group. Customer Satisfaction Study 2003. Prepared for State of Washington, Department of Labor & Industries. Seattle, WA: Gilmore Research Group; August 2003. Gilmore Research Group. Customer Satisfaction Study 2003. Prepared for State of Washington, Department of Labor & Industries. Seattle, WA: Gilmore Research Group; August 2003.
20.
go back to reference MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S. Unexpected barriers in return to work: lessons learned from injured worker peer support groups. Work. 2007;29(2):155–64.PubMed MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S. Unexpected barriers in return to work: lessons learned from injured worker peer support groups. Work. 2007;29(2):155–64.PubMed
21.
go back to reference Young AE. Return to work following disabling occupational injury–facilitators of employment continuation. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2010;36(6):473–83.PubMedCrossRef Young AE. Return to work following disabling occupational injury–facilitators of employment continuation. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2010;36(6):473–83.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Young AE. Employment maintenance and the factors that impact it after vocational rehabilitation and return to work. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32(20):1621–32.PubMedCrossRef Young AE. Employment maintenance and the factors that impact it after vocational rehabilitation and return to work. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32(20):1621–32.PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Heijbel B, Josephson M, Jensen I, Stark S, Vingard E. Return to work expectation predicts work in chronic musculoskeletal and behavioral health disorders: prospective study with clinical implications. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(2):173–84.PubMedCrossRef Heijbel B, Josephson M, Jensen I, Stark S, Vingard E. Return to work expectation predicts work in chronic musculoskeletal and behavioral health disorders: prospective study with clinical implications. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(2):173–84.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Hepp U, Moergeli H, Buchi S, Bruchhaus-Steinert H, Sensky T, Schnyder U. The long-term prediction of return to work following serious accidental injuries: a follow up study. BMC Psychiatry. 2011;11:53.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Hepp U, Moergeli H, Buchi S, Bruchhaus-Steinert H, Sensky T, Schnyder U. The long-term prediction of return to work following serious accidental injuries: a follow up study. BMC Psychiatry. 2011;11:53.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Iles RA, Davidson M, Taylor NF, O’Halloran P. Systematic review of the ability of recovery expectations to predict outcomes in non-chronic non-specific low back pain. J Occup Rehabil. 2009;19(1):25–40.PubMedCrossRef Iles RA, Davidson M, Taylor NF, O’Halloran P. Systematic review of the ability of recovery expectations to predict outcomes in non-chronic non-specific low back pain. J Occup Rehabil. 2009;19(1):25–40.PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Sandstrom J, Esbjornsson E. Return to work after rehabilitation. The significance of the patient’s own prediction. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1986;18(1):29–33.PubMed Sandstrom J, Esbjornsson E. Return to work after rehabilitation. The significance of the patient’s own prediction. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1986;18(1):29–33.PubMed
27.
go back to reference Klanghed U, Svensson T, Alexanderson K. Positive encounters with rehabilitation professionals reported by persons with experience of sickness absence. Work. 2004;22(3):247–54.PubMed Klanghed U, Svensson T, Alexanderson K. Positive encounters with rehabilitation professionals reported by persons with experience of sickness absence. Work. 2004;22(3):247–54.PubMed
28.
go back to reference Tanabe RP. Workers’ compensation laws as of January 2012. WC-12-18. Cambridge: Workers Compensation Research Institute; 2012. Tanabe RP. Workers’ compensation laws as of January 2012. WC-12-18. Cambridge: Workers Compensation Research Institute; 2012.
29.
go back to reference Kominski G, Pourat N, Roby D, Cameron M. Access to medical treatment in the California workers’ compensation system, 2006. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research; 2006. Kominski G, Pourat N, Roby D, Cameron M. Access to medical treatment in the California workers’ compensation system, 2006. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research; 2006.
Metadata
Title
Injured Workers’ Assessment of Vocational Rehabilitation Services Before and After Retraining
Authors
Jeanne M. Sears
Thomas M. Wickizer
Beryl A. Schulman
Publication date
01-09-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation / Issue 3/2014
Print ISSN: 1053-0487
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3688
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-013-9479-0

Other articles of this Issue 3/2014

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 3/2014 Go to the issue