Return-to-Work Following Occupational Rehabilitation for Long COVID: Descriptive Cohort Study.

Q2 Medicine
Katelyn Brehon, Riikka Niemeläinen, Mark Hall, Geoff P Bostick, Cary A Brown, Marguerite Wieler, Douglas P Gross
{"title":"Return-to-Work Following Occupational Rehabilitation for Long COVID: Descriptive Cohort Study.","authors":"Katelyn Brehon,&nbsp;Riikka Niemeläinen,&nbsp;Mark Hall,&nbsp;Geoff P Bostick,&nbsp;Cary A Brown,&nbsp;Marguerite Wieler,&nbsp;Douglas P Gross","doi":"10.2196/39883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Emerging evidence suggests that worldwide, between 30% and 50% of those who are infected with COVID-19 experience long COVID (LC) symptoms. These symptoms create challenges with return-to-work (RTW) in a high proportion of individuals with LC. To tailor rehabilitation programs to LC sequelae and help improve RTW outcomes, more research on LC rehabilitation program outcomes is needed.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study describes the characteristics and outcomes of workers who participated in an LC occupational rehabilitation program.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cohort study was conducted. Descriptive variables included demographic and occupational factors as well as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs, ie, the Fatigue Severity Scale [FSS], the Post-COVID Functional Scale [PCFS], the 36-item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36], the Pain Disability Index [PDI], the pain Visual Analogue Scale [VAS], the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9], the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire [GAD-7], and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders Fifth Edition [DSM-5] posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD] checklist [PCL-5]). The main outcome variable was the RTW status at discharge. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Logistic regression examined predictors of RTW.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sample consisted of 81 workers. Most workers were female (n=52, 64%) and from health-related occupations (n=43, 53%). Only 43 (53%) individuals returned to work at program discharge, with 40 (93%) of these returning to modified duties. Although there were statistically significant improvements on the pain VAS (mean 11.1, SD 25.6, t<sub>31</sub>=2.5, P=.02), the PDI (mean 9.4, SD 12.5, t<sub>32</sub>=4.3, P<.001), the FSS (mean 3.9, SD 8.7, t<sub>38</sub>=2.8, P=.01), the SF-36 PCS (mean 4.8, SD 8.7, t<sub>38</sub>=-3.5, P=.001), the PHQ-9 (mean 3.7, SD 4.0, t<sub>31</sub>=5.2, P<.001), and the GAD-7 (mean 1.8, SD 4.4, t<sub>22</sub>=1.8, P=.03), there were no significant improvements in the PCFS, the overall mental component score (MCS) of the SF-36, or on the PCL-5. The availability of modified duties (odds ratio [OR] 3.38, 95% CI 1.26-9.10) and shorter time between infection and admission for rehabilitation (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.00) predicted RTW even when controlling for age and gender.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Workers undergoing LC rehabilitation reported significant but modest improvements on a variety of PROMs, but only 43 (53%) returned to work. Outcomes would likely improve with increased availability of modified duties and timelier rehabilitation. Additional research is needed, including larger observational cohorts as well as randomized controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness of LC rehabilitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":36224,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies","volume":"9 3","pages":"e39883"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9484483/pdf/","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/39883","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Background: Emerging evidence suggests that worldwide, between 30% and 50% of those who are infected with COVID-19 experience long COVID (LC) symptoms. These symptoms create challenges with return-to-work (RTW) in a high proportion of individuals with LC. To tailor rehabilitation programs to LC sequelae and help improve RTW outcomes, more research on LC rehabilitation program outcomes is needed.

Objective: This study describes the characteristics and outcomes of workers who participated in an LC occupational rehabilitation program.

Methods: A cohort study was conducted. Descriptive variables included demographic and occupational factors as well as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs, ie, the Fatigue Severity Scale [FSS], the Post-COVID Functional Scale [PCFS], the 36-item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36], the Pain Disability Index [PDI], the pain Visual Analogue Scale [VAS], the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9], the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire [GAD-7], and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders Fifth Edition [DSM-5] posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD] checklist [PCL-5]). The main outcome variable was the RTW status at discharge. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Logistic regression examined predictors of RTW.

Results: The sample consisted of 81 workers. Most workers were female (n=52, 64%) and from health-related occupations (n=43, 53%). Only 43 (53%) individuals returned to work at program discharge, with 40 (93%) of these returning to modified duties. Although there were statistically significant improvements on the pain VAS (mean 11.1, SD 25.6, t31=2.5, P=.02), the PDI (mean 9.4, SD 12.5, t32=4.3, P<.001), the FSS (mean 3.9, SD 8.7, t38=2.8, P=.01), the SF-36 PCS (mean 4.8, SD 8.7, t38=-3.5, P=.001), the PHQ-9 (mean 3.7, SD 4.0, t31=5.2, P<.001), and the GAD-7 (mean 1.8, SD 4.4, t22=1.8, P=.03), there were no significant improvements in the PCFS, the overall mental component score (MCS) of the SF-36, or on the PCL-5. The availability of modified duties (odds ratio [OR] 3.38, 95% CI 1.26-9.10) and shorter time between infection and admission for rehabilitation (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.00) predicted RTW even when controlling for age and gender.

Conclusions: Workers undergoing LC rehabilitation reported significant but modest improvements on a variety of PROMs, but only 43 (53%) returned to work. Outcomes would likely improve with increased availability of modified duties and timelier rehabilitation. Additional research is needed, including larger observational cohorts as well as randomized controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness of LC rehabilitation.

长期COVID职业康复后重返工作岗位:描述性队列研究
背景:新出现的证据表明,在全球范围内,30%至50%的新冠肺炎感染者出现长期新冠肺炎(LC)症状。这些症状给高比例的LC患者的重返工作岗位(RTW)带来了挑战。为了根据LC后遗症制定康复计划并帮助改善RTW结果,需要对LC康复计划结果进行更多研究。目的:本研究描述参加LC职业康复计划的工人的特点和结果。方法:进行队列研究。描述性变量包括人口统计学和职业因素以及患者报告的结果测量(PROMs,即疲劳严重程度量表[FSS]、新冠肺炎后功能量表[PCFS]、36项简式健康调查[SF-36]、疼痛残疾指数[PDI]、疼痛视觉模拟量表[FAS]、9项患者健康问卷[PQ-9],7项广泛性焦虑症问卷[GAD-7]和精神障碍诊断与统计手册第五版[DSM-5]创伤后应激障碍[PPTSD]检查表[PCL-5])。主要的结果变量是出院时的RTW状态。计算描述性统计。Logistic回归检验了RTW的预测因素。结果:样本由81名工人组成。大多数工人是女性(n=52.64%)和健康相关职业(n=43.53%)。只有43人(53%)在项目结束后重返工作岗位,其中40人(93%)重返修改后的岗位。尽管疼痛VAS(平均值11.1,SD 25.6,t31=2.5,P=0.02)、PDI(平均值9.4,SD 12.5,t32=4.3,P38=2.8,P=0.01)、SF-36 PCS(平均值4.8,SD 8.7,t38=-3.5,P=0.001)、PHQ-9(平均值3.7,SD 4.0,t31=5.2,P22=1.8,P=0.03)有统计学上的显著改善,但PCFS、SF-36的整体心理成分评分(MCS)或PCL-5没有显著改善。即使在控制年龄和性别的情况下,改良任务的可用性(比值比[OR]3.38,95%CI 1.26-9.10)和从感染到入院康复的较短时间(OR 0.99,95%CI 0.99-1.00)也可以预测RTW。结论:接受LC康复的工人报告说,各种PROM有显著但适度的改善,但只有43人(53%)重返工作岗位。结果可能会随着可修改职责的增加和更及时的康复而改善。还需要更多的研究,包括更大的观察队列以及随机对照试验,以评估LC康复的有效性。
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
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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