A trial of a job-specific workers' health surveillance program for construction workers: study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Dutch construction workers are offered periodic health examinations. This care can be improved by tailoring this workers health surveillance (WHS) to the demands of the job and adjust the preventive actions to the specific health risks of a worker in a particular job. To improve the quality of the WHS for construction workers and stimulate relevant job-specific preventive actions by the occupational physician, we have developed a job-specific WHS. The job-specific WHS consists of modules assessing both physical and psychological requirements. The selected measurement instruments chosen, are based on their appropriateness to measure the workers' capacity and health requirements. They include a questionnaire and biometrical tests, and physical performance tests that measure physical functional capabilities. Furthermore, our job-specific WHS provides occupational physicians with a protocol to increase the worker-behavioural effectiveness of their counselling and to stimulate job-specific preventive actions. The objective of this paper is to describe and clarify our study to evaluate the behavioural effects of this job-specific WHS on workers and occupational physicians.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The ongoing study of bricklayers and supervisors is a nonrandomised trial to compare the outcome of an intervention (job-specific WHS) group (n = 206) with that of a control (WHS) group (n = 206). The study includes a three-month follow-up. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of participants who have undertaken one or more of the preventive actions advised by their occupational physician in the three months after attending the WHS. A process evaluation will be carried out to determine context, reach, dose delivered, dose received, fidelity, and satisfaction. The present study is in accordance with the TREND Statement.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study will allow an evaluation of the behaviour of both the workers and occupational physician regarding the preventive actions undertaken by them within the scope of a job-specific WHS.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=3012">NTR3012</a></p

Different work capacity impairments in patients with different work-anxieties

Purpose: Persons with work-anxieties are especially endangered for work-impairment and sick-leave. Work-impairment is not directly due to symptoms but due to illness-related capacity impairments. Work capacity impairments can be described on different dimensions (e.g. social interaction, decision making and judgment, endurance, mobility). Understanding the type of work capacity impairment is important for reintegration interventions This is the first study to investigate work capacity impairment in risk-patients with different work-anxieties. Methods: Two hundred forty four patients in inpatient rehabilitation suffering from work-anxieties were investigated concerning degree of work capacity impairment. Capacity impairment was described on 13 capacity dimensions according to the internationally evaluated observer-rating Mini-ICF-APP (impairment grades 0-4, grade 2 and higher indicating clinically relevant observable impairment). A physician´s rating on global work ability prognosis was obtained, and sick-leave duration during six months after assessment. Patients with different work-anxieties were compared concerning capacity impairments. Results: Patients with different work-anxieties were impaired in different capacity dimensions: work-related social anxiety went along with clinically relevant impairment in capacity of assertiveness (M=2.40), anxiety of insufficiency went along with impaired capacity of endurance (M=2.20), work-related generalized worrying was accompanied by impairment in the capacity for decision making (M=1.82). Specific capacity impairment dimensions were related with sick-leave duration, while a global work ability prognosis was not. Conclusions: The capacity approach is useful to describe work-impairment more precisely and beyond symptoms. On this basis reintegration-focusing interventions such as capacity training (e.g. social interaction training) or work adjustment (e.g. reducing exposure with interactional work tasks) can be initiated