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
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt 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 Patientenratgeber
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

11.09.2024

Rehabilitating Workers Aged 55 and Over: Professionals’ Perspectives and Solutions

verfasst von: Marie-José Durand, Marie-France Coutu, Alexandra Lecours, Guillaume Léonard, Valérie Lederer, Iuliana Nastasia, Junie Carrière, Marie-Andrée Paquette

Erschienen in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Work disability affects a growing number of workers aged 55 and over (W55 +). While rehabilitation programs have demonstrated efficacy for workers with an average age of 42, they often have not been designed to meet unique needs of aging workers. This study aimed to describe the difficulties encountered by work rehabilitation professionals and explore their solutions for improving services offered to W55 + .

Methods

This study used a simple descriptive design with purposive sampling. Occupational therapists, physical therapists, and psychologists were mainly recruited in private clinics. An interview guide based on the Work Disability Paradigm was piloted and used with the participants. Qualitative interviews were conducted with work rehabilitation professionals and then transcribed. A thematic analysis was performed.

Results

The sample consisted of fifteen participants (average age 38 years) with near equal representation across genders and disciplines. Difficulties were identified in relation to the (1) characteristics of W55 + , (2) work environment, (3) compensation system, and (4) communication among stakeholders. Five solutions were proposed to improve the services offered: provide healthcare professionals with access to tools and training, implement communication mechanisms, integrate a return-to-work coordinator, develop a joint action plan for managing W55 + , and implement an integrative prevention approach in workplaces.

Conclusions

Our results represent a first step in mapping various stakeholders’ needs to ensure better support for W55 + with work disabilities. These results delineate a roadmap for future research that should expand upon these stakeholders’ perspectives to provide a more comprehensive description of their needs and potential solutions.
Fußnoten
1
At the end of the quotations, the acronym OCT refers to a participating occupational therapist. Similarly, PHY refers to a participating physiotherapist, and PSY refers to a participating psychologist.
 
Literatur
1.
2.
Heuvel S, Zwaan L, Dam Lv, Oude Hengel K, Eekhout I, van Emmerik M, et al. Estimating the costs of work-related accidents and ill-health: an analysis of European data sources. Luxembourg: European Agency for Safety and Health at work, 2017.
3.
Public Health Agency of Canada. Economic burden of illness in Canada, 2005–2008. Ottawa: Government of Canada; 2014.
4.
International Labour Office. Plan safe, plan healthy: Guidelines for developing national programmes on occupational safety and health. Geneva: International Labour Organization; 2013.
5.
6.
7.
Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers responsible for seniors. Promoting the labour force participation of older Canadians: promising initiatives. Ottawa: Government of Canada; 2018.
8.
Hasselhorn HM, Wenke A. Understanding employment participation of older workers: creating a knowledge base for future labour market challenges. Berlin: Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS); 2015.
9.
Kelly K. The aging workforce: four steps to maximize older workers in your organization. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Kenan-Flagler Business School; 2015.
10.
11.
Smith PM, Black O, Keegel T, Collie A. Are the predictors of work absence following a work-related injury similar for musculoskeletal and mental health claims? J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24:79–88.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Van Eerd D, Smith P, Vu U. Implications of an aging workforce for work injury, recovery, returning to work and remaining at work. OOHNA J. 2019;38:30–36.
13.
14.
Boucher A, Duguay P, Busque M. Analysis of differences in compensation durations by gender and age group (Analyse des différences de durées d'indemnisation selon le sexe et le groupe d'âge). Montreal: Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail; 2019.
15.
Durand M-J, Coutu M-F, Tremblay D, Sylvain C, Gouin M-M, Bilodeau K, et al. Insights into the sustainable return to work of aging workers with a work disability: an interpretative description study. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31:92–106.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Loisel P, Durand M-J, Berthelette D, Vézina N, Baril R, Gagnon D, et al. Disability prevention: New paradigm for the management of occupational back pain. Dis-Manage-Health-Outcomes. 2001;9:351–360.CrossRef
17.
Lecours A, Bédard-Mercier R. The return to work experience of aging people with health injury: a scoping review (L’expérience de retour au travail des personnes vieillissantes ayant subi une atteinte à la santé: un examen de la portée). Can J Aging. 2023;42:1–12.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Neary J, Katikireddi SV, Brown J, Macdonald EB, Thomson H. Role of age and health in perceptions of returning to work: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health. 2019;19:1–10.CrossRef
19.
Lecours A, Laliberté M, Lord M-M, Léonard G, Ruel J. The process of rehabilitation, return and stay at work of aging workers who suffered an occupational injury: a portrait based on the experience of Canadian stakeholders. J Occup Rehabil. 2022;32:790–802.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Barros-Bailey M, Fischer J, Saunders JL. Age, work, and disability: rehabilitation at the end of the worklife. J Appl Rehabil Couns. 2007;38:20–31.
21.
Dong S. Assessing workplace accommodation requests among older workers. Rehabil Couns Bull. 2018;61:101–111.CrossRef
22.
Saunders C, Brown JJ, Carter DJ, Lapkin S. Chronic disease management support in Australian workplaces—low base, rising need. Health Promot J Austr. 2018;29:257–264.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Tremblay PC. An exploratory empirical study on the judicial treatment of requests for reasonable accommodation in the workplace (Une étude empirique exploratoire sur le traitement juridictionnel des demandes d’accommodement raisonnable en milieu de travail). The Law Notebooks (Les Cahiers de droit). 2018;59:727–776.CrossRef
24.
Cullen KL, Irvin E, Collie A, Clay F, Gensby U, Jennings PA, et al. Effectiveness of workplace interventions in return-to-work for musculoskeletal, pain-related and mental health conditions: an update of the evidence and messages for practitioners. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28:1–15.PubMedCrossRef
25.
26.
Bourgeois É. Analysis of training needs in organizations: a theoretical and methodological model (L’analyse des besoins de formation dans les organisations: un modèle théorique et méthodologique). Mes Eval Educ. 1991;14:17–59.
27.
Roegiers X, Wouters P, Gérard F-M. From the concept of training needs analysis to its implementation (Du concept d’analyse de besoins en formation à sa mise en œuvre). Training and technologies—European journal of training professionals (Formation et technologies-Revue européenne des professionnels de la formation). 1992;1:32–42.
28.
Reme SE. Common mental disorders and work: barriers and opportunities. In: Bültmann U, Siegrist J, editors. Handbook of disability, work and health. Cham: Springer; 2020. p. 467–81.CrossRef
29.
Fortin M-F, Gagnon J. Fundamentals and steps of the research process: quantitative and qualitative methods (Fondements et étapes du processus de recherche: méthodes quantitatives et qualitatives), Montreal: Chenelière éducation; 2016.
30.
Reed K, Jaxson L. Shared decision making: exploring the experience of mental health practitioners. NZ J Occup Therapy. 2019;66:5–10.
31.
Verhaegh KJ, Seller-Boersma A, Simons R, Steenbruggen J, Geerlings SE, de Rooij SE, et al. An exploratory study of healthcare professionals’ perceptions of interprofessional communication and collaboration. J Interprof Care. 2017;31:397–400.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006;18:59–82.CrossRef
33.
Paillé P, Mucchielli A. Qualitative analysis in human and social sciences (L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales). Paris: Armand Colin; 2012.CrossRef
34.
Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2002.
35.
Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldaña J. Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook. 4th ed. Los Angeles: Sage publications; 2020.
36.
Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, McLean RM, Forciea MA. Noninvasive treatments for acute, subacute, and chronic low back pain: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166:514–530.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Ng W, Slater H, Starcevich C, Wright A, Mitchell T, Beales D. Barriers and enablers influencing healthcare professionals’ adoption of a biopsychosocial approach to musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis. Pain. 2021;162:2154–2185.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Hudon A, Hunt M, Ehrmann FD. Physiotherapy for injured workers in Canada: are insurers’ and clinics’ policies threatening good quality and equity of care? Results of a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18:1–13.CrossRef
39.
Russell E, Kosny A. Communication and collaboration among return-to-work stakeholders. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;41:2630–2639.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Bartys S, Frederiksen P, Bendix T, Burton K. System influences on work disability due to low back pain: an international evidence synthesis. Health Policy. 2017;121:903–912.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Main CJ, Shaw WS, Nicholas MK, Linton SJ. System-level efforts to address pain-related workplace challenges. Pain. 2022;163:1425–1431.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Hudon A, Lippel K, MacEachen E. Mapping first-line health care providers’ roles, practices, and impacts on care for workers with compensable musculoskeletal disorders in four jurisdictions: a critical interpretive synthesis. Am J Ind Med. 2019;62:545–558.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Lippel K. Regulatory contexts affecting work reintegration of people with chronic disease and disabilities: an international perspective. In: Bültmann U, Siegrist J, editors. Handbook of disability, work and health. Cham: Springer; 2020. p. 1–17.
44.
Desmette D, Iweins De Wavrans C, Yzerbyt V. Ageism and age management at work (Âgisme et gestion des âges au travail). In Lagacé M, editor. Representations and discourses on aging: the hidden face of ageism? (Représentations et discours sur le vieillissement: la face cachée de l'âgisme?). Québec : Les Presses de l’Université Laval; 2015. pp.147–171.
45.
Côté D, Dubé J, Gravel S, Gratton D, White BW. Cumulative stigma among injured immigrant workers: a qualitative exploratory study in Montreal (Quebec, Canada). Disabil Rehabil. 2020;42:1153–1166.PubMedCrossRef
46.
47.
Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms (Charte des droits et libertés de la personne du Québec), C-12 (1975).
48.
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Sect. 7, Part 1 of the Constitution Act (1982).
49.
Sorensen G, McLellan DL, Sabbath EL, Dennerlein JT, Nagler EM, Hurtado DA, et al. Integrating worksite health protection and health promotion: a conceptual model for intervention and research. Prev Med. 2016;91:188–196.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Calvet B, Vézina N, Laberge M, Nastasia I, Sultan-Taïeb H, Toulouse G, et al. Integrative prevention and coordinated action toward primary, secondary and tertiary prevention in workplaces: a scoping review. Work. 2021;70:893–908.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Corbière M, Mazaniello-Chézol M, Bastien M-F, Wathieu E, Bouchard R, Panaccio A, et al. Stakeholders’ role and actions in the return-to-work process of workers on sick-leave due to common mental disorders: a scoping review. J Occup Rehabil. 2020;30:381–419.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Dol M, Varatharajan S, Neiterman E, McKnight E, Crouch M, McDonald E, et al. Systematic review of the impact on return to work of return-to-work coordinators. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31:675–698.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Link BG, Phelan JC. Conceptualizing stigma. Annu Rev Sociol. 2001;27:363–385.CrossRef
54.
Hsieh W, Faulkner N, Wickes R. What reduces prejudice in the real world? A meta-analysis of prejudice reduction field experiments. Brit J of Soc Psychol. 2022;61(3):689–710.CrossRef
55.
Lytle A, Nowacek N, Levy SR. Instapals: Reducing ageism by facilitating intergenerational contact and providing aging education. Gerontol Geriatr Educ. 2020;41(3):308–319.PubMedCrossRef
56.
O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89:1245–1251.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Rehabilitating Workers Aged 55 and Over: Professionals’ Perspectives and Solutions
verfasst von
Marie-José Durand
Marie-France Coutu
Alexandra Lecours
Guillaume Léonard
Valérie Lederer
Iuliana Nastasia
Junie Carrière
Marie-Andrée Paquette
Publikationsdatum
11.09.2024
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
Print ISSN: 1053-0487
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-3688
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-024-10236-5