The assessment of efforts to return to work in the European Union

Background: Assessment of efforts to promote return-to-work (RTW) includes all efforts (vocational and non-vocational) designed to improve the work ability of the sick-listed employee and increase the chance to return to work. Aim of the study was to investigate whether in 13 European countries these RTW efforts are assessed and to compare the procedures by means of six criteria. METHODS: Data were gathered in the taxonomy project of the European Union of Medicine in Assurance and Social Security and by means of an additional questionnaire. RESULTS: In seven countries RTW efforts are subject of the assessment in relation to the application for disability benefits. Description of RTW efforts is a prerequisite in five countries. Guidelines on the assessment of RTW efforts are only available in the Netherlands and no countries report the use of the ICF model. Based on the results of the additional questionnaire, the assessor is a social scientist or a physician. The information used to assess RTW efforts differs, from a report on the RTW process to medical information. A negative outcome of the assessment leads to delay of the application for disability benefits or to application for rehabilitation subsidy. Conclusion: RTW efforts are assessed in half of the participating European countries. When compared, the characteristics of the assessment of RTW efforts in the participating European countries show both similarities and differences. This study may facilitate the gathering and exchange of knowledge and experience between countries on the assessment of RTW efforts

Exploring factors relevant in the assessment of the return-to-work process of employees on long-term sickness absence due to a depressive disorder: a focus group study

Background: Efforts undertaken during the Return-to-Work (RTW) process need to be sufficient in order to optimize the quality of the RTW process. The purpose of this study was to explore factors relevant to Return-to-Work Effort Sufficiency (RTW-ES) in cases of sick-listed employees with a Depressive Disorder (DD). Method: A case of a long-term sick-listed employee with a DD applying for disability benefits was used to gather arguments and grounds relevant to the assessment of RTW-ES. Two focus group meetings were held, consisting of Labor Experts working at the Dutch Social Insurance Institute. Factors were collected and categorized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF model). Results: Sixteen factors relevant to RTW-ES assessment in a case of DD were found, categorized in the ICF-model under activities (e. g. functional capacity), personal (e. g. competencies, attitude) and environmental domain (e. g. employer-employee relationship), or categorized under interventions, job accommodations and measures. Conclusions: This study shows that 16 factors are relevant in the assessment of RTW-ES in employees sick-listed due to DD. Further research is necessary to expand this knowledge to other health conditions, and to investigate the impact of these results on the quality of the RTW-ES assessment

Identifying factors relevant in the assessment of return-to-work efforts in employees on long-term sickness absence due to chronic low back pain: a focus group study

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Efforts undertaken during the return to work (RTW) process need to be sufficient to prevent unnecessary applications for disability benefits. The purpose of this study was to identify factors relevant to RTW Effort Sufficiency (RTW-ES) in cases of sick-listed employees with chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: Using focus groups consisting of Labor Experts (LE's) working at the Dutch Social Insurance Institute, arguments and underlying grounds relevant to the assessment of RTW-ES were investigated. Factors were collected and categorized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF model). RESULTS: Two focus groups yielded 19 factors, of which 12 are categorized in the ICF model under activities (e.g. functional capacity) and in the personal (e.g. age, tenure) and environmental domain (e.g. employer-employee relationship). The remaining 7 factors are categorized under intervention, job accommodation and measures. CONCLUSIONS: This focus group study shows that 19 factors may be relevant to RTW-ES in sick-listed employees with CLBP. Providing these results to professionals assessing RTW-ES might contribute to a more transparent and systematic approach. Considering the importance of the quality of the RTW process, optimizing the RTW-ES assessment is essential

Influence of Efforts of Employer and Employee on Return-to-Work Process and Outcomes

Background Research on disability and RTW outcome has led to significant advances in understanding these outcomes, however, limited studies focus on measuring the RTW process. After a prolonged period of sickness absence, the assessment of the RTW process by investigating RTW Effort Sufficiency (RTW-ES) is essential. However, little is known about factors influencing RTW-ES. Also, the correspondence in factors determining RTW-ES and RTW is unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate 1) the strength and relevance of factors related to RTW-ES and RTW (no/partial RTW), and 2) the comparability of factors associated with RTW-ES and with RTW. Methods During 4 months, all assessments of RTW-ES and RTW (no/partial RTW) among employees applying for disability benefits after 2 years of sickness absence, performed by labor experts at 3 Dutch Social Insurance Institute locations, were investigated by means of a questionnaire. Results Questionnaires concerning 415 cases were available. Using multiple logistic regression analysis, the only factor related to RTW-ES is a good employer-employee relationship. Factors related to RTW (no/partial RTW) were found to be high education, no previous periods of complete disability and a good employer-employee relationship. Conclusions Different factors are relevant to RTW-ES and RTW, but the employer-employee relationship is relevant for both. Considering the importance of the assessment of RTW-ES after a prolonged period of sickness absence among employees who are not fully disabled, this knowledge is essential for the assessment of RTW-ES and the RTW process itself

Correction: The evaluation of a web-based tool for measuring the uncorrected visual acuity and refractive error in keratoconus eyes: A method comparison study

The evaluation of a web-based tool for measuring the uncorrected visual acuity and refractive error in keratoconus eyes: A method comparison study (PLoS ONE (2021) 16:8 (e0256087) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256087

The evaluation of a web-based tool for measuring the uncorrected visual acuity and refractive error in keratoconus eyes: A method comparison study

Purpose To evaluate the outcome of a web-based digital assessment of visual acuity and refractive error, compared to a conventional supervised assessment, in keratoconus patients with complex refractive errors. Material and methods Keratoconus patients, aged 18 to 40, with a refractive error between -6 and +4 diopters were considered eligible. An uncorrected visual acuity and an assessment of refractive error was taken web-based (index test) and by manifest refraction (reference test) by an optometrist. Corrected visual acuity was assessed with the prescription derived from both the webbased tool and the manifest refraction. Non-inferiority was defined as the 95% limits-ofagreement (95%LoA) of the differences in spherical equivalent between the index and reference test not exceeding +/- 0.5 diopters. Agreement was assessed by a Bland-Altman analyses. Results A total of 100 eyes of 50 patients were examined. The overall mean difference of the uncorrected visual acuity measured -0.01 LogMAR (95%LoA:-0.63-0.60). The variability of the differences decreased in the better uncorrected visual acuity subgroup (95%LoA:-0.25- 0.55). The overall mean difference in spherical equivalent between the index and reference test exceeded the non-inferiority margin: -0.58D (95%LoA:-4.49-3.33, P = 0.008). The mean differences for myopic and hyperopic subjects were 0.09 diopters (P = 0.675) and -2.06 diopters (P<0.001), respectively. The corrected visual acuities attained with the webbased derived prescription underachieved significantly (0.22±0.32 logMAR vs. -0.01±0.13 LogMAR, P <0.001). Conclusions Regarding visual acuity, the web-based tool shows promising results for remotely assessing visual acuity in keratoconus patients, particularly for subjects within a better visual acuity range. This could provide physicians with a quantifiable outcome to enhance teleconsultations, especially relevant when access to health care is limited. Regarding the assessment of the refractive error, the web-based tool was found to be inferior to the manifest refraction in keratoconus patients. This study underlines the importance of validating digital tools and could serve to increase overall safety of the web-based assessments by better identification of outlier cases