Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research: A Review with Recommendations for Future Research
Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Hopkinton, USA.
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland.
EMGO Institute, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
The Hong Kong Polytechnic Institute, Hong Kong, China.
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: Journal of occupational rehabilitation, ISSN 1053-0487, E-ISSN 1573-3688, Vol. 26, no 4, 434-447 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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 For those who had withdrawn from the labor force (Type 4), predominant outcomes were cost and vocational status.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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
New York, USA: Springer, 2016. Vol. 26, no 4, 434-447 p.
Keyword [en]
Disability outcome measures, research priorities, methods, review
National Category
Work Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-53357DOI: 10.1007/s10926-016-9675-9PubMedID: 27787691ScopusID: 2-s2.0-84992699702OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-53357DiVA: diva2:1044220
Available from: 2016-11-02 Created: 2016-11-02 Last updated: 2016-12-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Linton, Steven J.
By organisation
School of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, Sweden
In the same journal
Journal of occupational rehabilitation
Work Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 29 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link