Prognostic Factors and Models for Predicting Work Absence in Adults with Musculoskeletal Conditions Consulting a Healthcare Practitioner: A Systematic Review.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Gwenllian Wynne-Jones, Elaine Wainwright, Nicola Goodson, Joanne L Jordan, Amardeep Legha, Millie Parchment, Ross Wilkie, George Peat
{"title":"Prognostic Factors and Models for Predicting Work Absence in Adults with Musculoskeletal Conditions Consulting a Healthcare Practitioner: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Gwenllian Wynne-Jones, Elaine Wainwright, Nicola Goodson, Joanne L Jordan, Amardeep Legha, Millie Parchment, Ross Wilkie, George Peat","doi":"10.1007/s10926-024-10205-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>It is difficult to predict which employees, in particular those with musculoskeletal pain, will return to work quickly without additional vocational advice and support, which employees will require this support and what levels of support are most appropriate. Consequently, there is no way of ensuring the right individuals are directed towards the right services to support their occupational health needs. The aim of this review will be to identify prognostic factors for duration of work absence in those already absent and examine the utility of prognostic models for work absence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eight databases were search using a combination of subject headings and key words focusing on work absence, musculoskeletal pain and prognosis. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies, extracted data from all eligible studies and assessed risk of bias using the QUIPS or PROBAST tools, an adapted GRADE was used to assess the strength of the evidence. To make sense of the data prognostic variables were grouped according to categories from the Disability Prevention Framework and the SWiM framework was utilised to synthesise findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 23 studies were included in the review, including 13 prognostic models and a total of 110 individual prognostic factors. Overall, the evidence for all prognostic factors was weak, although there was some evidence that older age and better recovery expectations were protective of future absence and that previous absence was likely to predict future absences. There was weak evidence for any of the prognostic models in determining future sickness absence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Analysis was difficult due to the wide range of measures of both prognostic factors and outcome and the differing timescales for follow-up. Future research should ensure that consistent measures are employed and where possible these should be in-line with those suggested by Ravinskaya et al. (2023).</p>","PeriodicalId":48035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-024-10205-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: It is difficult to predict which employees, in particular those with musculoskeletal pain, will return to work quickly without additional vocational advice and support, which employees will require this support and what levels of support are most appropriate. Consequently, there is no way of ensuring the right individuals are directed towards the right services to support their occupational health needs. The aim of this review will be to identify prognostic factors for duration of work absence in those already absent and examine the utility of prognostic models for work absence.

Methods: Eight databases were search using a combination of subject headings and key words focusing on work absence, musculoskeletal pain and prognosis. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies, extracted data from all eligible studies and assessed risk of bias using the QUIPS or PROBAST tools, an adapted GRADE was used to assess the strength of the evidence. To make sense of the data prognostic variables were grouped according to categories from the Disability Prevention Framework and the SWiM framework was utilised to synthesise findings.

Results: A total of 23 studies were included in the review, including 13 prognostic models and a total of 110 individual prognostic factors. Overall, the evidence for all prognostic factors was weak, although there was some evidence that older age and better recovery expectations were protective of future absence and that previous absence was likely to predict future absences. There was weak evidence for any of the prognostic models in determining future sickness absence.

Conclusion: Analysis was difficult due to the wide range of measures of both prognostic factors and outcome and the differing timescales for follow-up. Future research should ensure that consistent measures are employed and where possible these should be in-line with those suggested by Ravinskaya et al. (2023).

Abstract Image

向医疗保健从业人员咨询的患有肌肉骨骼疾病的成人缺勤预测因素和模型:系统回顾。
目的:很难预测哪些员工,尤其是那些患有肌肉骨骼疼痛的员工,在没有额外的职业建议和支持的情况下会很快重返工作岗位,哪些员工需要这种支持,以及何种程度的支持最合适。因此,没有办法确保正确的人获得正确的服务,以支持他们的职业健康需求。本综述旨在确定已经缺勤的员工缺勤持续时间的预后因素,并研究缺勤预后模型的实用性:方法:使用主题词和关键词组合检索了八个数据库,重点关注缺勤、肌肉骨骼疼痛和预后。两位作者独立评估了研究的资格,从所有符合条件的研究中提取了数据,并使用 QUIPS 或 PROBAST 工具评估了偏倚风险。为了使数据更有意义,预后变量按照残疾预防框架的类别进行了分组,并利用 SWiM 框架对研究结果进行了综合:共有 23 项研究被纳入综述,其中包括 13 个预后模型和 110 个单个预后因素。总体而言,所有预后因素的证据都很薄弱,但有一些证据表明,年龄越大、康复预期越好对未来的缺勤越有保护作用,而且以前的缺勤情况很可能会预测未来的缺勤情况。任何一种预后模型在决定未来病假缺勤方面的证据都很薄弱:由于预后因素和结果的测量方法多种多样,而且随访的时间尺度各不相同,因此分析工作十分困难。未来的研究应确保采用一致的测量方法,在可能的情况下,这些方法应与 Ravinskaya 等人(2023 年)建议的方法一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: The Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on the rehabilitation, reintegration, and prevention of disability in workers. The journal offers investigations involving original data collection and research synthesis (i.e., scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses). Papers derive from a broad array of fields including rehabilitation medicine, physical and occupational therapy, health psychology and psychiatry, orthopedics, oncology, occupational and insurance medicine, neurology, social work, ergonomics, biomedical engineering, health economics, rehabilitation engineering, business administration and management, and law.  A single interdisciplinary source for information on work disability rehabilitation, the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation helps to advance the scientific understanding, management, and prevention of work disability.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信