Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Konkret geht es um den Diabetes-Patienten mit kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen oder Risiken, die Herzinsuffizienz sowie die kardiovaskuläre Primär- und Sekundärprävention. Sind Sie hier schon auf dem neuesten Stand? Unsere Experten beleuchten, wo und warum das bisherige Procedere geändert werden soll und was in der Praxis sinnvoll ist. Holen Sie sich Ihr Update und 2 CME-Punkte beim MMW-Webinar am 24. April von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. 
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
Erschienen in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 1/2015

01.03.2015 | Review

Healing or Harming? Healthcare Provider Interactions with Injured Workers and Insurers in Workers’ Compensation Systems

verfasst von: Elizabeth Kilgour, Agnieszka Kosny, Donna McKenzie, Alex Collie

Erschienen in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation | Ausgabe 1/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction Healthcare providers (HCPs) are influential in the injured worker’s recovery process and fulfil many roles in the delivery of health services. Interactions between HCPs and insurers can also affect injured workers’ engagement in rehabilitation and subsequently their recovery and return to work. Consideration of the injured workers’ perceptions and experiences as consumers of medical and compensation services can provide vital information about the quality, efficacy and impact of such systems. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesize published qualitative research that focused on the interactions between injured workers, HCPs and insurers in workers’ compensation systems in order to identify processes or interactions which impact injured worker recovery. Method A search of six electronic databases for literature published between 1985 and 2012 revealed 1,006 articles. Screening for relevance identified 27 studies which were assessed for quality against set criteria. A final 13 articles of medium and high quality were retained for data extraction. Results Findings were synthesized using a meta-ethnographic approach. Injured workers reported that HCPs could play both healing and harming roles in their recovery. Supportive patient-centred interaction with HCPs is important for injured workers. Difficult interactions between HCPs and insurers were highlighted in themes of adversarial relations and organisational pressures. Insurer and compensation system processes exerted an influence on the therapeutic relationship. Recommendations to improve relationships included streamlining administrative demands and increasing education and communication between the parties. Conclusion Injured workers with long term complex injuries experience difficulties with healthcare in the workers’ compensation context. Changes in insurer administrative demands and compensation processes could increase HCP participation and job satisfaction. This in turn may improve injured worker recovery. Further research into experiences of distinct healthcare professions with workers’ compensation systems is warranted.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
Reflexivity refers to the comments made by the authors of each article on how the context, selection of participants or data collection process affected the results obtained in their study.
 
Literatur
1.
Klanghed U, Svensson T, Alexanderson K. Positive encounters with rehabilitation professionals reported by persons with experience of sickness absence. Work. 2004;22:247–54.PubMed
2.
Nielsen M, Madsen I, Bultmann U, Christensen U, Diderichsen F, Rugulies R. Encounters between workers sick-listed with common mental disorders and return-to-work stakeholders. Does workers’ gender matter? Scand J Public Health. 2013;41:191–7.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Loisel P, Durand M, Baril R, Gervais J, Falardeau M. Interorganizational collaboration in occupational rehabilitation: perceptions of an interdisciplinary rehabilitation team. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15(4):581–90.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Frank J, Sinclair S, Hogg-Johnson S, Shannon H, Bombardier C, Beaton D, Cole D. Preventing disability from work-related low-back pain—new evidence gives new hope—if we can just get all the players onside. Can Med Assoc J. 1998;158:1625–31.
5.
Soeker MS, Wegner L, Pretorius B. I’m going back to work: back injured client’s perceptions and experiences of their worker roles. Work. 2008;30:161–70.PubMed
6.
Sager L, James C. Injured worker’s perspectives of their rehabilitation process under the New South Wales workers compensation system. Aust Occup Ther J. 2005;52:127–35.CrossRef
7.
8.
9.
10.
Brines J, Salazar M, Graham K, Pergola T, Connon C. Injured workers’ perceptions of case management services: a descriptive study. Am Assoc Occup Health Nurse J. 1994;47(8):355–64.
11.
Crisp R. A qualitative study of the perceptions of individuals with disabilities concerning health and rehabilitation professionals. Disabil Soc. 2000;15(2):355–67.CrossRef
12.
Darragh A, Sample P, Krieger S. “Tears in my eyes ‘cause somebody finally understood”: client perceptions of practitioners following brain injury. Am J Occup Ther. 2001;55(2):191–9.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Barclay L. Exploring factors that influence the goal setting process for occupational therapy intervention with an individual with spinal cord injury. Aust Occup Ther J. 2002;49:3–13.CrossRef
14.
Tarasuk V, Eakin JM. The problem of legitimacy in the experience of work-related back-injury. Qual Health Res. 1995;5(2):204–21.CrossRef
15.
Kirsh B, Slack T, King CA. The nature and impact of stigma towards injured workers. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22:143–54.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Lippel K. Therapeutic and anti-therapeutic consequences of workers compensation. Int J Law Psychiatry. 1999;22(5–6):521–46.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Niemeyer LO. Social labelling, stereotyping, and observer bias in workers’ compensation: the impact of provider-patient interaction on outcome. J Occup Rehabil. 1991;1(4):251–69.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Hadler N. If you have to prove you are ill, you can’t get well: the object lesson in fibromyalgia. Spine. 1996;21(20):2397–400.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Carey TS, Hadler NM. The role of the primary physician in disability determination for social security insurance and workers’ compensation. Ann Int Med. 1986;104(5):706–10.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Pransky G, Katz JN, Benjamin K, Himmelstein J. Improving the physician role in evaluation work ability and managing disability: a survey of primary care practitioners. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24(16):867–74.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Lippel K, Lefebvre M, Schmidt C, Caron J. Managing claims or caring for claimants: effects of the compensation on the health of injured workers. Research report. Quebec: Université du Quebec a Montreal; 2007.
22.
Carey TS, Hadler N, Gillings D, Stinnett S, Wallsten T. Medical disability assessment of back pain for the social security administration: the weighting of presenting clinical features. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41(7):691–7.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Lax MB, Manetti FA, Klein RA. Medical evaluation of work-related illness: evaluations by a treating occupational medicine specialist and by independent medical examiners compared. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2004;10:1–12.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Laerum E, Indahal A, Skouen JS. What is “the good back-consultation?” A combined qualitative and quantitative study of chronic low back pain patients’ interaction with and perceptions of consultations with specialists. J Rehabil Med. 2006;38:255–62.CrossRefPubMed
25.
26.
Svensson T, Karlsson A, Alexanderson K, Nordqvist C. Shame-inducing encounters. Negative emotional aspects of sickness-absentees’ interactions with rehabilitation professionals. J Occup Rehabil. 2003;13(3):183–95.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Mussener U, Festin K, Upmark M, Alexanderson K. Positive experiences of encounters with healthcare and social insurance professionals among people on long-term sick leave. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40:805–11.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Ostlund G, Borg K, Wide P, Hensing G, Alexanderson K. Clients’ perceptions of contact with professionals within healthcare and social insurance offices. Scand J Public Health. 2003;31:275–82.CrossRefPubMed
29.
30.
Calzoni T. The client perspective: the missing link in work injury and rehabilitation studies. J Occup Health Saf Aust NZ. 1997;13(1):47–57.
31.
Franche RL, Cullen K, Clarke J, Irvin E, Sinclair S, Frank J, The Institute for Work and Health (IWH) Workplace-Based RTW Intervention Literature Review Research Team. Workplace-based return-to-work interventions: a systematic review of the quantitative literature. J Occup Rehabil. 1997;15(4):607–31.CrossRef
32.
Robson L, Clarke J, Cullen K, Bielecky A, Severin C, Bigelow P, Irvin E, Culyer A, Mahood Q. The effectiveness of occupational health and safety management system interventions: a systematic review. Saf Sci. 2007;45:329–53.CrossRef
33.
Lagerveld S, Bultmann U, Franche RL, van Dijk F, Vlasveld M, van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Bruinvels D, Huijs J, Blonk R, van der Klink JJ, Nieuwenhuijsen K. Factors associated with work participation and work functioning in depressed workers: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20:275–92.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
34.
Carroll C, Rick J, Pilgrim H, Cameron J, Hillage J. Workplace involvement improves return to work rates among employees with back pain on long-term sick leave: a systematic review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32(8):607–21.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Lamontagne A, Keegal T, Louie A, Ostry A, Landsbergis P. A systematic review of the job-stress intervention evaluation literature, 1990–2005. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2007;13:268–80.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Spearing N, Connelly L. Is compensation ‘bad for health’? A systematic meta-review. Injury. 2011;42:15–24.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Spearing N, Connelly L, Gargett S, Sterling M. Does injury compensation lead to worse health after whiplash? A systematic review. Pain. 2012;153(6):1274–82.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Tompa E, Trevithick S, McLeod C. Systematic review of the prevention incentives of insurance and regulatory mechanisms for occupational health and safety. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2007;33(2):85–95.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Tompa E, de Oliveira C, Dolinschi R, Irvin E. A systematic review of disability management interventions with economic evaluations. J Occup Rehabil. 2008;18:16–26.CrossRefPubMed
40.
MacEachen E, Clarke J, Franche RL, Irvin E. The Workplace-based Return to Work Literature Review Group. Systematic review of the qualitative literature on return to work after injury. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2006;32:257–69.
41.
MacEachen E, Kosny A, Scott-Dixon K, Facey M, Chambers L, Breslin C, Kyle N, Irvin E, Mahood Q. The Small Business Systematic Review Team. Workplace health understandings and processes in small businesses: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20:180–98.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Kilgour E, Kosny A, McKenzie D, Collie A. Interactions between injured workers and insurers in workers’ compensation systems: a systematic review of qualitative research literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2014. doi:10.​1007/​s10926-014-9513-x.
43.
Grant G, Studdert D. Poisoned chalice? A critical analysis of the evidence linking personal injury compensation processes with adverse health outcomes. Melb Univ Law Rev. 2009;33(3):865–85.
44.
Spencer L, Ritchie J, Lewis J, Dillon L. Quality in qualitative evaluation: a framework for assessing research evidence. London: Cabinet Office; 2003.
45.
Noblit G, Hare R. Meta-ethnography: synthesizing qualitative studies. California: Sage Publications; 1998.
46.
Beardwood B, Kirsh B, Clark N. Victims twice over: perceptions and experiences of injured workers. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(1):30–48.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Cacciacarro L, Kirsh B. Exploring the mental health needs of injured workers. Can J Occup Ther. 2006;73(3):178–87.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Cromie J, Robertson V, Best M. Physical therapists who claimed workers’ compensation: a qualitative study. Phys Ther. 2003;83(12):1080–9.PubMed
49.
Hubertsson J, Petersson I, Arvidsson B, Thorstensson C. Sickness absence in musculoskeletal disorders—patients’ experiences of interactions with the social insurance agency and health care: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health. 2011;11(1):107.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
50.
Jaye C, Fitzgerald R. The lived political economy of occupational overuse syndrome among New Zealand workers. Sociol Health Illn. 2010;32(7):1010–25.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Kosny A, MacEachen E, Ferrier S, Chambers L. The role of healthcare providers in long term and complicated workers’ compensation claims. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(4):582–90.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Lippel K. Workers describe the effect of the workers’ compensation process on their health: a Quebec study. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2007;30(4):427–43.CrossRefPubMed
53.
MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S. Unexpected barriers in return to work: lessons learned from injured worker peer support groups. Work. 2007;29(2):155–64.PubMed
54.
MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Chambers L. The, “toxic dose” of system problems: why some injured workers don’t return to work as expected. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(3):349–66.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Murray M. Fish harvesters with injuries accounts of their experiences with the workers’ compensation system. Work. 2007;28(1):47–56.PubMed
56.
Reid J, Ewan C, Lowy E. Pilgrimage of pain: the illness experiences of women with repetition strain injury and the search for credibility. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32(5):601–12.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Roberts-Yates C. The concerns and issues of injured workers in relation to claims/injury management and rehabilitation: the need for new operational frameworks. Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25(16):898–907.CrossRefPubMed
58.
Strunin L, Boden L. The workers’ compensation system: worker friend or foe? Am J Ind Med. 2004;45(4):338–45.CrossRefPubMed
59.
60.
Lax M. Independent of What? The independent medical examination business. New Solut. 2004;14(3):219–51.CrossRefPubMed
61.
Lippel K. Preserving workers’ dignity in workers’ compensation systems: an international perspective. Am J Ind Med. 2012;55:519–36.CrossRefPubMed
62.
Kominski G, Pourat N, Roby D, Cameron M. Return to work and degree of recovery among injured workers in California’s workers’ compensation system. J Occup Environ Med. 2008;50(3):296–305.CrossRefPubMed
63.
Palmadottir G. Client-therapist relationships: experiences of occupational therapy clients in rehabilitation. Br J Occup Ther. 2006;69(9):394–401.
64.
Beck RS, Daughtridge R, Sloane PH. Physician-patient communication in primary care office: a systematic review. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2002;15(1):25–38.PubMed
65.
Wessel M, Helgesson G, Olsson D, Niklas J, Alexanderson K, Lynoe N. When do patients feel wronged? Empirical study of sick-listed patients’ experiences with healthcare encounters. Eur J Public Health. 2013;23(2):230–5.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Dembe AE. The social consequences of occupational injury and illnesses. Am J Ind Med. 2001;40:403–17.CrossRefPubMed
67.
Hall J, Roter D, Milburn MA, Daltroy LH. Patients’ health as a predictor of physician behaviour in medical visits: a synthesis of four studies. Med Care. 1996;34:1205–18.CrossRefPubMed
68.
Bovier PA, Perneger TV. Predictors of work satisfaction among physicians. Eur J Public Health. 2003;13:299–305.CrossRefPubMed
69.
Freeborn DK. Satisfaction, commitment, and psychological well-being among HMO physicians. West J Med. 2001; 174: 13–18. http://​www.​ewjm.​com. Accessed 28 Aug 2013.
70.
Di Matteo MR, Sherbourne CD, Hays RD, Ordway L, Kravitz RL, McGlynn EA, Kaplan S, Rogers WH. Physicians characteristics influence patients adherence to medical treatment: results from the medical outcomes study. Health Psychol. 1993;12(2):93–102.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Healing or Harming? Healthcare Provider Interactions with Injured Workers and Insurers in Workers’ Compensation Systems
verfasst von
Elizabeth Kilgour
Agnieszka Kosny
Donna McKenzie
Alex Collie
Publikationsdatum
01.03.2015
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation / Ausgabe 1/2015
Print ISSN: 1053-0487
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-3688
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9521-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2015

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 1/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Editorial

Evolving Editorial Processes at the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

OriginalPaper

Validation of the 4DSQ Somatization Subscale in the Occupational Health Care Setting as a Screener

OriginalPaper

Predictors of Return to Work in Cancer Survivors in the Royal Air Force

Review

Quality of Working Life Issues of Employees with a Chronic Physical Disease: A Systematic Review

Review

Interactions Between Injured Workers and Insurers in Workers’ Compensation Systems: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research Literature

OriginalPaper

Factors Related to Participation in Paid Work After Organ Transplantation: Perceptions of Kidney Transplant Recipients