Cited by 231Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMedical Practices and RehabilitationWorkplace Health and Well-being

Can Cross Country Differences in Return-to-Work After Chronic Occupational Back Pain be Explained? An Exploratory Analysis on Disability Policies in a Six Country Cohort Study

Open access
Anema, J. R., Schellart, A. J. M., Cassidy, J. D., Loisel, P., Veerman, T. J., van der Beek, A. J.·2009·Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: There are substantial differences in the number of disability benefits for occupational low back pain (LBP) among countries. There are also large cross country differences in disability policies. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) there are two principal policy approaches: countries which have an emphasis on a compensation policy approach or countries with an emphasis on an reintegration policy approach. The International Social Security Association initiated this study to explain differences in return-to-work (RTW) among claimants with long term sick leave due to LBP between countries with a special focus on the effect of different disability policies. METHODS: A multinational cohort of 2,825 compensation claimants off work for 3-4 months due to LBP was recruited in Denmark, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United States. Relevant predictors and interventions were measured at 3 months, one and 2 years after the start of sick leave. The main outcome measure was duration until sustainable RTW (i.e. working after 2 years). Multivariate analyses were conducted to explain differences in sustainable RTW between countries and to explore the effect of different disability policies. RESULTS: Medical and work interventions varied considerably between countries. Sustainable RTW ranged from 22% in the German cohort up to 62% in the Dutch cohort after 2 years of follow-up. Work interventions and job characteristics contributed most to these differences. Patient health, medical interventions and patient characteristics were less important. In addition, cross-country differences in eligibility criteria for entitlement to long-term and/or partial disability benefits contributed to the observed differences in sustainable RTW rates: less strict criteria are more effective. The model including various compensation policy variables explained 48% of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: Large cross-country differences in sustainable RTW after chronic LBP are mainly explained by cross-country differences in applied work interventions. Differences in eligibility criteria for long term disability benefits contributed also to the differences in RTW. This study supports OECD policy recommendations: Individual packages of work interventions and flexible (partial) disability benefits adapted to the individual needs and capacities are important for preventing work disability due to LBP.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10926-009-9202-3

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent studies indicate that in addition to workers' personal factors, environmental factors such as job characteristics, work modifications, involved stakeholders, and the compensation system are of upmost importance for SAW and RTW.

    “Recent studies indicate that in addition to workers' personal factors (workers' characteristics, health, and medical care), environmental factors such as job characteristics, work modifications, involved stakeholders, and the compensation system are of upmost importance for SAW and RTW [54-56].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 28 · Cited by 231

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [1]Waddell G Aylward M Sawney P Back pain, incapacity for work and social security benefits: an international literature review and analysis 2002 London Royal Society of Medicine Press

Authors
Anema, J. R., Schellart, A. J. M., Cassidy, J. D., Loisel, P., Veerman, T. J., & van der Beek, A. J.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (NL)
  • University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
Anema, J. R.
Venue
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
Published
2009-09-18
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
419-426
ISSN
  • 1053-0487 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3688
OpenAlex
W1996884394
Cited by
231
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 21
FWCI
10.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
Keywords
return to work, chronic low back pain, occupational low back pain, disability benefits, disability policy, compensation policy, reintegration policy, long-term sick leave, cross-national differences, work disability prevention
MeSH terms
Back Pain, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Disability Evaluation, Employment, Europe, Female, Health Policy, Humans, Israel, Male, Occupational Diseases, United States, Sick Leave

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review