Systematic review of the qualitative literature on return to work after injury.

OBJECTIVES This paper reports on a systematic review of the international qualitative research literature on return to work. This review was undertaken in order to better understand the dimensions, processes, and practices of return to work. Because return to work often includes early return before full recovery while a person is undergoing rehabilitation treatment, physical recovery is embedded in complicated ways with workplace processes and practices and social organization. These process-oriented dimensions of return to work are well described in the qualitative literature. METHODS This systematic review of the literature covered peer-reviewed papers that focused on musculoskeletal and pain-related injuries and were published in English or French between 1990 and 2003. Findings from papers meeting relevance and quality criteria were synthesized using the meta-ethnographic approach. RESULTS This review found that return to work extends beyond concerns about managing physical function to the complexities related to beliefs, roles, and perceptions of many players. Good will and trust are overarching conditions that are central to successful return-to-work arrangements. In addition, there are often social and communication barriers to return to work, and intermediary players have the potential to play a key role in facilitating this process. CONCLUSIONS This paper identifies key mechanisms of workplace practice, process, and environment that can affect the success of return to work. The findings illustrate the contribution that qualitative literature can make to important aspects of implementation in relation to return to work.

[1]  M Dixon-Woods,et al.  Qualitative research in systematic reviews , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[2]  K. Alexanderson,et al.  Views of Laypersons on the Role Employers Play in Return to Work When Sick-Listed , 2003, Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation.

[3]  G. Gard,et al.  How Can the Rehabilitation Planning Process at the Workplace Be Improved? A Qualitative Study from Employers' Perspective , 2003, Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation.

[4]  Sandy Oliver,et al.  Applying systematic review methods to studies of people’s views: an example from public health research , 2004, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[5]  R. Habeck,et al.  Successful Employer Strategies for Preventing and Managing Disability. , 1998 .

[6]  K. Cullen,et al.  Workplace-Based Return-to-Work Interventions: A Systematic Review of the Quantitative Literature , 2005, Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation.

[7]  S. Hawker,et al.  Appraising the Evidence: Reviewing Disparate Data Systematically , 2002, Qualitative health research.

[8]  Eric Mykhalovskiy,et al.  Reframing the evaluation of qualitative health research: reflections on a review of appraisal guidelines in the health sciences. , 2003, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[9]  Sandy Oliver,et al.  Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[10]  Michelle M. Robertson,et al.  Employee Perspectives on the Role of Supervisors to Prevent Workplace Disability After Injuries , 2003, Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation.

[11]  A. Yassi,et al.  Return-to-work: The importance of human interactions and organizational structures. , 2001, Work.

[12]  C. Pope,et al.  Using meta ethnography to synthesise qualitative research: a worked example , 2002, Journal of health services research & policy.

[13]  G. Noblit,et al.  Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies , 1988 .

[14]  Rosaline S Barbour,et al.  Evaluating and synthesizing qualitative research: the need to develop a distinctive approach. , 2003, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[15]  Jenny Donovan,et al.  Evaluating meta-ethnography: a synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. , 2003, Social science & medicine.

[16]  C. Seale,et al.  Quality in Qualitative Research , 1999 .

[17]  D. Cole,et al.  Management of return-to-work programs for workers with musculoskeletal disorders: a qualitative study in three Canadian provinces. , 2003, Social science & medicine.

[18]  D. Shrey Disability management in industry: the new paradigm in injured worker rehabilitation. , 1996, Disability and rehabilitation.

[19]  T. J. Sullivan,et al.  Determinants of duration of disability and return-to-work after work-related injury and illness: challenges for future research. , 2001, American journal of industrial medicine.

[20]  Christine Roberts-Yates The concerns and issues of injured workers in relation to claims/injury management and rehabilitation: the need for new operational frameworks , 2003, Disability and rehabilitation.

[21]  Joan M. Eakin,et al.  ‘Playing it smart’ with return to work: small workplace experience under Ontario’s policy of self-reliance and early return , 2003 .

[22]  Frank W. Neuhauser,et al.  Modified Work and Return to Work: A Review of the Literature , 1998, Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation.

[23]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[24]  C. Seale Quality in Qualitative Research , 1999 .

[25]  Leon Straker,et al.  Workplace assessments and functional capacity evaluations: current practices of therapists in Australia. , 2002, Work.