Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research: A Review with Recommendations for Future Research

The Hopkinton Conference Working Group on Workplace Disability Prevention

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction Outcome assessment is a central issue in work disability prevention research. The goal of this paper was to (1) ascertain the most salient workplace outcomes; (2) evaluate the congruence between business and science perspectives; (3) illustrate new perspectives on assessing longitudinal outcomes; and (4) provide recommendations for advancing outcome evaluation in this area of research. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration that culminated in a sponsored 3-day conference, “Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability”, held October 14–16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience. Results Numerous workplace work-disability prevention outcome measures were identified. Analysis indicated that their applicability varied depending on the type of work disability the worker was experiencing. For those who were working, but with health-related work limitations (Type 1), predominant outcomes were measures of productivity, presenteeism, and work-related limitations. For those who were off work due to a health condition (Type 2), predominant outcomes were measures of time off work, supervisor/employee interactions, and return-to-work (RTW) preparation. For those who had returned to work (Type 3), predominant outcomes were measures of presenteeism, time until RTW, percentage of work resumption, employment characteristics, stigma, work engagement, co-worker interactions, and sustained or durable RTW. For those who had withdrawn from the labor force (Type 4), predominant outcomes were cost and vocational status. Discussion Currently available measures provide a good basis to use more consistent outcomes in disability prevention in the future. The research area would also benefit from more involvement of employers as stakeholders, and multilevel conceptualizations of disability outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)434-447
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Occupational Rehabilitation
Volume26
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2016

Fingerprint

Workplace
Research
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Return to Work
Health
Publications
Industry
Research Personnel
Efficiency
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • Disability outcome measures
  • Methods
  • Research priorities
  • Review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation
  • Occupational Therapy

Cite this

Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research : A Review with Recommendations for Future Research. / The Hopkinton Conference Working Group on Workplace Disability Prevention.

In: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, Vol. 26, No. 4, 01.12.2016, p. 434-447.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

The Hopkinton Conference Working Group on Workplace Disability Prevention. / Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research : A Review with Recommendations for Future Research. In: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation. 2016 ; Vol. 26, No. 4. pp. 434-447.
@article{1794db3826da49a5b51292c567015e18,
title = "Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research: A Review with Recommendations for Future Research",
abstract = "Introduction Outcome assessment is a central issue in work disability prevention research. The goal of this paper was to (1) ascertain the most salient workplace outcomes; (2) evaluate the congruence between business and science perspectives; (3) illustrate new perspectives on assessing longitudinal outcomes; and (4) provide recommendations for advancing outcome evaluation in this area of research. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration that culminated in a sponsored 3-day conference, “Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability”, held October 14–16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience. Results Numerous workplace work-disability prevention outcome measures were identified. Analysis indicated that their applicability varied depending on the type of work disability the worker was experiencing. For those who were working, but with health-related work limitations (Type 1), predominant outcomes were measures of productivity, presenteeism, and work-related limitations. For those who were off work due to a health condition (Type 2), predominant outcomes were measures of time off work, supervisor/employee interactions, and return-to-work (RTW) preparation. For those who had returned to work (Type 3), predominant outcomes were measures of presenteeism, time until RTW, percentage of work resumption, employment characteristics, stigma, work engagement, co-worker interactions, and sustained or durable RTW. For those who had withdrawn from the labor force (Type 4), predominant outcomes were cost and vocational status. Discussion Currently available measures provide a good basis to use more consistent outcomes in disability prevention in the future. The research area would also benefit from more involvement of employers as stakeholders, and multilevel conceptualizations of disability outcomes.",
keywords = "Disability outcome measures, Methods, Research priorities, Review",
author = "{The Hopkinton Conference Working Group on Workplace Disability Prevention} and Young, {Amanda E.} and Eira Viikari-Juntura and Boot, {C{\'e}cile R L} and Chetwyn Chan and {de Porras}, {David Gimeno Ruiz} and Linton, {Steven J.} and Amick, {Benjamin C.} and Anema, {Johannes R.} and Elyssa Besen and Peter Blanck and Peter Blanck and Ute B{\"u}ltmann and Chan, {Chetwyn C H} and Delclos, {George L.} and Kerstin Ekberg and Ehrhart, {Mark G.} and Fassier, {Jean Baptiste} and Michael Feuerstein and David Gimeno and Kristman, {Vicki L.} and Linton, {Steven J.} and Main, {Chris J.} and Fehmidah Munir and Nicholas, {Michael K.} and Glenn Pransky and Shaw, {William S.} and Sullivan, {Michael J.} and Tetrick, {Lois E.} and Tveito, {Torill H.} and Eira Viikari-Juntura and Kelly Williams-Whitt and Young, {Amanda E.}",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10926-016-9675-9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "434--447",
journal = "Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation",
issn = "1053-0487",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research

T2 - A Review with Recommendations for Future Research

AU - The Hopkinton Conference Working Group on Workplace Disability Prevention

AU - Young, Amanda E.

AU - Viikari-Juntura, Eira

AU - Boot, Cécile R L

AU - Chan, Chetwyn

AU - de Porras, David Gimeno Ruiz

AU - Linton, Steven J.

AU - Amick, Benjamin C.

AU - Anema, Johannes R.

AU - Besen, Elyssa

AU - Blanck, Peter

AU - Blanck, Peter

AU - Bültmann, Ute

AU - Chan, Chetwyn C H

AU - Delclos, George L.

AU - Ekberg, Kerstin

AU - Ehrhart, Mark G.

AU - Fassier, Jean Baptiste

AU - Feuerstein, Michael

AU - Gimeno, David

AU - Kristman, Vicki L.

AU - Linton, Steven J.

AU - Main, Chris J.

AU - Munir, Fehmidah

AU - Nicholas, Michael K.

AU - Pransky, Glenn

AU - Shaw, William S.

AU - Sullivan, Michael J.

AU - Tetrick, Lois E.

AU - Tveito, Torill H.

AU - Viikari-Juntura, Eira

AU - Williams-Whitt, Kelly

AU - Young, Amanda E.

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - Introduction Outcome assessment is a central issue in work disability prevention research. The goal of this paper was to (1) ascertain the most salient workplace outcomes; (2) evaluate the congruence between business and science perspectives; (3) illustrate new perspectives on assessing longitudinal outcomes; and (4) provide recommendations for advancing outcome evaluation in this area of research. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration that culminated in a sponsored 3-day conference, “Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability”, held October 14–16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience. Results Numerous workplace work-disability prevention outcome measures were identified. Analysis indicated that their applicability varied depending on the type of work disability the worker was experiencing. For those who were working, but with health-related work limitations (Type 1), predominant outcomes were measures of productivity, presenteeism, and work-related limitations. For those who were off work due to a health condition (Type 2), predominant outcomes were measures of time off work, supervisor/employee interactions, and return-to-work (RTW) preparation. For those who had returned to work (Type 3), predominant outcomes were measures of presenteeism, time until RTW, percentage of work resumption, employment characteristics, stigma, work engagement, co-worker interactions, and sustained or durable RTW. For those who had withdrawn from the labor force (Type 4), predominant outcomes were cost and vocational status. Discussion Currently available measures provide a good basis to use more consistent outcomes in disability prevention in the future. The research area would also benefit from more involvement of employers as stakeholders, and multilevel conceptualizations of disability outcomes.

AB - Introduction Outcome assessment is a central issue in work disability prevention research. The goal of this paper was to (1) ascertain the most salient workplace outcomes; (2) evaluate the congruence between business and science perspectives; (3) illustrate new perspectives on assessing longitudinal outcomes; and (4) provide recommendations for advancing outcome evaluation in this area of research. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration that culminated in a sponsored 3-day conference, “Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability”, held October 14–16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience. Results Numerous workplace work-disability prevention outcome measures were identified. Analysis indicated that their applicability varied depending on the type of work disability the worker was experiencing. For those who were working, but with health-related work limitations (Type 1), predominant outcomes were measures of productivity, presenteeism, and work-related limitations. For those who were off work due to a health condition (Type 2), predominant outcomes were measures of time off work, supervisor/employee interactions, and return-to-work (RTW) preparation. For those who had returned to work (Type 3), predominant outcomes were measures of presenteeism, time until RTW, percentage of work resumption, employment characteristics, stigma, work engagement, co-worker interactions, and sustained or durable RTW. For those who had withdrawn from the labor force (Type 4), predominant outcomes were cost and vocational status. Discussion Currently available measures provide a good basis to use more consistent outcomes in disability prevention in the future. The research area would also benefit from more involvement of employers as stakeholders, and multilevel conceptualizations of disability outcomes.

KW - Disability outcome measures

KW - Methods

KW - Research priorities

KW - Review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992699702&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992699702&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10926-016-9675-9

DO - 10.1007/s10926-016-9675-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 27787691

AN - SCOPUS:84992699702

VL - 26

SP - 434

EP - 447

JO - Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

JF - Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

SN - 1053-0487

IS - 4

ER -