Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Developmental Conceptualization of Return to Work

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction: Although return to work (RTW) is a phenomenon that has been researched for many years, our ability to understand and improve outcomes is still limited. As an avenue for advancing the field, this paper presents an alternative way of thinking about RTW. Method: The conceptualization was constructed based on a review of the literature and the comments of RTW and workers' compensation researchers. Results: RTW is presented as an evolving process, comprising four key phases: i.e., “off work,” “work re-entry,” “retention,” and “advancement.” In addition, multiple phase-specific outcomes that may be used to evaluate RTW success are advanced. Conclusion: Broadening thinking about RTW to take into consideration the complexities of its developmental nature holds promise for understanding and improving RTW, as it not only clarifies the importance of incremental milestones, but also facilitates intervention choice and evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chandler D. Constructing return to work programs: Building for better returns. In: Workers' Compensation: Containing costs and managing outcomes—A PERI Symposium 2003. Fairfax, VA: Public Entity Risk Institute, 2003.

  2. Creen M. Best practices for disability management. J Ontario Occup Health Nurses Assoc 2002; Winter: 4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Williams C, Reno V, Burton JF, Jr. Workers' compensation: Benefits, coverage, and costs, 2001. Washington, DC: National Academy of Social Insurance, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Humphrey T. 2004 N.O.D./Harris survey. New York: Harris Interactive Inc. 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Biddle J. Estimation and analysis of long-term wage losses and wage replacement rates of Washington state workers compensation claimants. Olympia: Department of Labor and Industry, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boden LI, Galizzi M. Economic Consequences of workplace injuries and illnesses: Lost earnings and benefit adequacy. Am J Ind Med 1999; 36: 487–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Reville R, Boden L, Biddle J. Comparing Compensation Adequacy: Workers' Compensation Permanent Disability Benefits in Five States. Santa Monica: RAND, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Young AE, Wasiak R, Roessler RT, McPherson KM, Anema JR, van Poppel MNM. Return-to-work outcomes following work disability: Stakeholder motivations, interests and concerns. J Occup Rehabil 2005; 15: 557–568.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pransky G, Gatchel R, Linton S, Loisel P. Improving return-to-work research. J Occup Rehabil 2005; 15: 453–457.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Krause N, Dasinger LK, Deegan LJ, Rudolph L, Brand RJ. Psychosocial job factors and return-to-work after compensated low back injury: A disability phase-specific analysis. Am J Ind Med 2001; 40: 374–392.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vingard E, Mortimer M, Wiktorin C, Pernold RPTG, Fredriksson K, Nemeth G, et al. Seeking care for low back pain in the general population: A two-year follow-up study—Results from the MUSIC-Norrtalje Study. Spine 2002; 27: 2159–2165.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lame IE, Peters ML, Vlaeyen JW, Kleef M, Patijn J. Quality of life in chronic pain is more associated with beliefs about pain, than with pain intensity. Eur J Pain 2005; 9: 15–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chernen L, Friedman S, Goldberg N, Feit A, Kwan T, Stein R. Cardiac disease and nonorganic chest pain: Factors leading to disability. Cardiology 1995; 86: 15–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Indahl A, Haldorsen EH, Holm S, Reikeras O, Ursin H. Five-year follow-up study of a controlled clinical trial using light mobilization and an informative approach to low back pain. Spine 1998; 23: 2625–2630.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mueser KT, Torrey WC, Lynde D, Singer P, Drake RE. Implementing evidence-based practices for people with severe mental illness. Behav Modif 2003; 27: 387–411.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Loisel P, Abenhaim L, Durand P, Esdaile J, Suissa S, Gosselin L, et al. A population-based, randomized clinical trial on back pain management. Spine 1997; 22: 2911–2918.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Franche RL, Krause N. Readiness for return to work following injury or illness: Conceptualizing the interpersonal impact of health care, workplace, and insurance factors. J Occup Rehabil 2002; 12: 233–256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Krause N, Ragland DR. Occupational disability due to low back pain: A new interdisciplinary classification based on a phase model of disability. Spine 1994; 19: 1011–1020.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Durand MJ, Loisel P, Hong QN, Charpentier N. Helping clinicians in work disability prevention: The work disability diagnosis interview. J Occup Rehabil 2002; 12: 191–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rudolph L, Dervin K, Cheadle A, Maizlish N, Wickizer T. What do injured workers think about their medical care and outcomes after work injury? J Occup Environ Med 2002; 44: 425–434.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Keogh JP, Nuwayhid I, Gordon JL, Gucer PW. The impact of occupational injury on injured worker and family: Outcomes of upper extremity cumulative trauma disorders in Maryland workers. Am J Ind Med 2000; 38: 498–506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pransky G, Benjamin K, Hill-Fotouhi C, Fletcher KE, Himmelstein J, Katz JN. Work-related outcomes in occupational low back pain: A multidimensional analysis. Spine 2002; 27: 864–870.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wasiak R, Pransky G, Verma S, Webster B. Recurrence of low back pain: Definition-sensitivity analysis using administrative data. Spine 2003; 28: 2283–2291.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Becker DR, Smith J, Tanzman B, Drake RE, Tremblay T. Fidelity of supported employment programs and employment outcomes. Psychiatr Serv 2001; 52: 834–836.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. In: http://www3.who.int/icf/icftemplate.cfm?myurl=introduction.html%20&mytitle=Introduction. Geneva: WHO, 2002.

  26. Keough J, Fisher T. Occupational-psychosocial perceptions influencing return to work and functional performance of injured workers. Work 2001; 16: 101–110.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Savickas M. The theory and practice of career construction. In: Brown S, Lent R, eds. Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work. New York: Wiley, 2005, pp. 42–70.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Savickas M. Career construction. A developmental theory of vocational behavior. In: Brown D, Associates, eds. Career choice and development (4th ed). San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Buys N, Renne J. Developing relationships between vocational rehabilitation agencies and employers. Rehabil Couns Bull 2001; 44: 95–103.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Dix J, Savickas M. Establishing a career: Developmental tasks and coping responses. J Vocat Behav 1995; 47.

  31. Super D, Savickas M, Super C. The life-span, life-space approach to careers. In: Brown D, Brooks L, Associates, eds. Career choice & development (3rd ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996, pp. 121–187.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Williams C, Savickas M. Developmental tasks of career maintenance. J Vocat Behav 1990; 36: 166–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Higginson IJ, Carr AJ. Measuring quality of life: Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. BMJ 2001; 322: 1297–1300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Armstrong D, Ogden J, Lilford R, Wessely S. Quality of life as an innovative health technology. Heslington, York: Economic and Social Research Council, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Almli CR, Finger S, eds. Early brain damage. New York: Academic Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wade D. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wade D, Halligan P. New wine in old bottles: The WHO ICF as an explanatory model of human behaviour. Clin Rehabil 2003; 17: 349–354.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Levack W, McPherson K, McNaughton H. Success in the workplace following traumatic brain injury: Are we evaluating what is most important? Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26: 290–298.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Disability Research, Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, 71 Frankland Rd, Hopkinton, Massachusetts

    Amanda E. Young PhD & Radoslaw Wasiak

  2. Department of Rehabilitation, Human Resources, and Communication Disorders, College of Education and Health Professions, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas

    Richard T. Roessler

  3. Centre for Physical Rehabilitation Research, Division of Rehabilitation and Occupation Studies, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand

    Kathryn M. McPherson

  4. Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University Medical Center, Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Mireille N. M. van Poppel & J. R. Anema

  5. Center for Disability Research, Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, 71 Frankland Rd, Hopkinton, MA, 01748, USA

    Amanda E. Young PhD

Authors
  1. Amanda E. Young PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard T. Roessler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Radoslaw Wasiak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kathryn M. McPherson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mireille N. M. van Poppel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. R. Anema
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amanda E. Young PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Young, A.E., Roessler, R.T., Wasiak, R. et al. A Developmental Conceptualization of Return to Work. J Occup Rehabil 15, 557–568 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-005-8034-z

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-005-8034-z

Key Words

Search

Navigation