{"title":"Integrated mental health care and vocational rehabilitation intervention to improve return to work rates for people on sick leave due to common mental and functional disorders (IBBIS-II) - results from a randomized clinical trial.","authors":"Thomas Nordahl Christensen, Carsten Hjorthøj, Chalotte Heinsvig Poulsen, Bea Ebersbach, Lene Falgaard Eplov","doi":"10.1080/08039488.2024.2446362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>More than 50% of people receiving long-term sickness benefits in Denmark have a common mental illness. At the same time, a significant treatment gap exists where less than 30% receive sufficient care for their mental illness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The trial was designed as an investigator-initiated, randomized, two-group parallel superiority trial. Nine hundred participants with a common mental illness were randomly assigned into two groups: (1) IBBIS II, consisting of integrated mental health care and vocational rehabilitation, or (2) service as usual (SAU), at two sites in Denmark. The primary outcome was the difference between the two groups in time to return to work (RTW) at 12 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no difference between the integrated IBBIS II intervention and SAU in time from baseline to RTW at the 12-month follow-up (Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.16 (95% CI 0.99-1.37), <i>p</i> = 0.07), but there was a tendency that the IBBIS II group had worse outcomes on several exploratory employment measures, including time to return to work at 6-month follow-up (HR = 1.36 (95% CI 1.03-1.55), <i>p</i> = 0.02), and number of weeks in work at 12-month follow-up (incidence rate ratio = 1.14 (95% CI 1.04-1.27), <i>p</i> = 0.008).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The integrated employment and health intervention (IBBIS II) was not more effective than SAU in any of the included vocational outcomes and may even have been inferior to SAU on certain outcome measures. Based on these results, it is not recommended that the IBBIS II intervention is widely implemented in countries with service as usual comparable with Denmark.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov. Registered June 16, 2020, NCT04432129. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04432129?term = IBBIS+II.</p>","PeriodicalId":19201,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"86-95"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08039488.2024.2446362","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在丹麦,50%以上领取长期疾病津贴的人患有常见的精神疾病。与此同时,在治疗方面却存在着巨大的差距,只有不到 30% 的人能够得到足够的精神疾病治疗:该试验是一项由研究者发起的随机两组平行优效试验。900 名患有常见精神疾病的参与者被随机分配到两组:(1) IBBIS II,包括综合精神健康护理和职业康复;或 (2) 照常服务 (SAU),在丹麦的两个地点进行。主要结果是两组在12个月后重返工作岗位(RTW)时间上的差异:结果:IBBIS II 综合干预与 SAU 在 12 个月随访时从基线到重返工作岗位的时间上没有差异(危险比 (HR) = 1.16 (95% CI 0.99-1.37),P = 0.07),但IBBIS II组在几项探索性就业指标上的结果更差,包括6个月随访时的复工时间(HR = 1.36 (95% CI 1.03-1.55),p = 0.02)和12个月随访时的工作周数(发病率比 = 1.14 (95% CI 1.04-1.27),p = 0.008):讨论:综合就业与健康干预(IBBIS II)在所包含的任何职业结果方面都没有比SAU更有效,甚至在某些结果指标上可能还不如SAU。基于这些结果,我们不建议在与丹麦类似的国家广泛实施 IBBIS II 干预措施:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov.2020年6月16日注册,NCT04432129。https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04432129?term = IBBIS+II。
Integrated mental health care and vocational rehabilitation intervention to improve return to work rates for people on sick leave due to common mental and functional disorders (IBBIS-II) - results from a randomized clinical trial.
Background: More than 50% of people receiving long-term sickness benefits in Denmark have a common mental illness. At the same time, a significant treatment gap exists where less than 30% receive sufficient care for their mental illness.
Methods: The trial was designed as an investigator-initiated, randomized, two-group parallel superiority trial. Nine hundred participants with a common mental illness were randomly assigned into two groups: (1) IBBIS II, consisting of integrated mental health care and vocational rehabilitation, or (2) service as usual (SAU), at two sites in Denmark. The primary outcome was the difference between the two groups in time to return to work (RTW) at 12 months.
Results: There was no difference between the integrated IBBIS II intervention and SAU in time from baseline to RTW at the 12-month follow-up (Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.16 (95% CI 0.99-1.37), p = 0.07), but there was a tendency that the IBBIS II group had worse outcomes on several exploratory employment measures, including time to return to work at 6-month follow-up (HR = 1.36 (95% CI 1.03-1.55), p = 0.02), and number of weeks in work at 12-month follow-up (incidence rate ratio = 1.14 (95% CI 1.04-1.27), p = 0.008).
Discussion: The integrated employment and health intervention (IBBIS II) was not more effective than SAU in any of the included vocational outcomes and may even have been inferior to SAU on certain outcome measures. Based on these results, it is not recommended that the IBBIS II intervention is widely implemented in countries with service as usual comparable with Denmark.
期刊介绍:
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry publishes international research on all areas of psychiatry.
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry is the official journal for the eight psychiatry associations in the Nordic and Baltic countries. The journal aims to provide a leading international forum for high quality research on all themes of psychiatry including:
Child psychiatry
Adult psychiatry
Psychotherapy
Pharmacotherapy
Social psychiatry
Psychosomatic medicine
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry accepts original research articles, review articles, brief reports, editorials and letters to the editor.