Cited by 11Medical Practices and RehabilitationOccupational Health and Safety in WorkplacesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Best practices in the rehabilitation of acute musculoskeletal disorders in workers with injuries: an integrative review and analysis of evolving trends

Lysaght, Rosemary, Donnelly, Catherine, Luong, Dorothy·2010·WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Strategies for the restoration of function and job performance in workers with musculoskeletal disorders have changed considerably since industrial rehabilitation became a distinct specialization in the 1980s. A rich body of research concerning approaches to medical and rehabilitative management of these disorders exists, resulting in a large number of hybrid approaches worldwide. METHODS: This integrative review examined the evidence base for best practices in the rehabilitation of acute musculoskeletal workplace injuries, and also mapped the evolution of approaches over the past thirty years. Contextual factors that may have contributed to change were assessed through analysis of changing practice trends and review of descriptive literature over time. RESULTS: A clear movement away from simplistic, unidimensional approaches towards comprehensive workplace interventions is evident. Economic concerns and growing government and insurance regulation of workplace safety and injury management were the likely drivers of change. While the contributions of various elements of disability management in the workplace were examined, many features of onsite interventions remain to be examined. CONCLUSIONS: A strong body of research has produced notable advances in management of acute musculoskeletal workplace injury. Research concerning the delivery of workplace-based interventions, the role of workplace environment factors and a range of worker outcomes will further advance knowledge in this field.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/wor-2010-0993

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lysaght, R., Donnelly, C., & Luong, D.
Affiliations
Queen's University (CA)
Venue
WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation
Published
2010-01
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
319-333
ISSN
  • 1051-9815 (ISSN-L)
  • 1875-9270
OpenAlex
W1661575768
Cited by
11
References
48
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 3
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Work (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • 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
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
musculoskeletal disorders, occupational injuries, vocational rehabilitation, industrial rehabilitation, disability management, best practices, return to work, occupational safety regulations, injury management, employee outcomes, practice trends
MeSH terms
Humans, Musculoskeletal Diseases, Rehabilitation, Databases, Bibliographic, Occupational Health, Occupational Exposure

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