Cited by 40Workplace Health and Well-beingMedical Practices and RehabilitationOccupational Health and Safety in Workplaces

Effect of an intervention to enhance guideline adherence of occupational physicians on return-to-work self-efficacy in workers sick-listed with common mental disorders

Open access
van Beurden, Karlijn M., van der Klink, Jac J. L., Brouwers, Evelien P. M., Joosen, Margot C. W., Mathijssen, Jolanda J. P., Terluin, Berend, van Weeghel, Jaap·2015·BMC Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Since a higher level of self-efficacy in common mental disorders is associated with earlier return-to-work (RTW), it is important to know if work related self-efficacy can be increased by occupational health care. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether an intervention to enhance guideline adherence of occupational physicians lead to an increase in RTW self-efficacy in workers three months later. The secondary aim was to evaluate whether the intervention modified the association between RTW self-efficacy and return-to-work three months later. METHODS: A total of 66 occupational physicians participated in the study. They were randomized into two groups; the intervention group received a training, the control group did not. The training aimed to enhance adherence to a mental health guideline that contained strategies that are supposed to enhance RTW self-efficacy. In 128 sick-listed workers guided by these occupational physicians, RTW self-efficacy, RTW, and personal, health-related and work-related variables were measured at baseline and three months later. Generalized linear mixed models analysis and linear mixed models analysis were used for the evaluations. RESULTS: In workers whose occupational physicians had received the training RTW self-efficacy increased significantly more than in workers whose occupational physicians had participated in the control group (t = -2.626, p ≤ .05). Higher baseline RTW self-efficacy scores were significantly more often associated with full RTW than with no RTW three months later (OR 2.20, 95 % CI 1.18-4.07), but the intervention did not affect this association. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that a training to enhance guideline adherence of occupational physicians leads to increased RTW self-efficacy in workers sick-listed with common mental disorders during the first months of sickness absence in a real-life occupational health care setting. This insight is helpful for optimizing the recovery and RTW process, and for understanding the role of RTW self-efficacy in this process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN86605310.

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 · 10.1186/s12889-015-2125-3

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Beurden, K. M., van der Klink, J. J. L., Brouwers, E. P. M., Joosen, M. C. W., Mathijssen, J. J. P., Terluin, B., & van Weeghel, J.
Affiliations
  • Tilburg University (NL)
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2015-08-19
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
796-796
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1836119245
Cited by
40
References
43
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
9.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
ZonMw (208030001)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
Keywords
return to work, return-to-work self-efficacy, occupational physicians, guideline adherence, mental health guidelines, sick-listed workers, common mental disorders, sick leave, occupational health services
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Occupational Health Services, Physician's Role, Time Factors, Workplace, Sick Leave, Guideline Adherence, Self Efficacy, Return to Work

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