Capability to make well-founded decisions: an interview study of people with experience of sickness absence who have common mental disorders.

BACKGROUND: Sickness absence and rehabilitation processes can be challenging for an individual. At a time of generally reduced capacity, the individual must comprehend and navigate through several options. The aim of this study was to investigate the prerequisites for support, knowledge and information related to decision making experienced by people on sickness absence due to common mental disorders. METHODS: A qualitative explorative approach was used. Face-to-face interviews took place with 11 sick-listed individuals with common mental disorders. Patients were recruited from different sources in the western part of Sweden, such as primary health care centres, patient organizations and via social media. Data analysis was performed using manifest content analysis, meaning that the analysis was kept close to the original text, and on a low level of interpretation and abstraction. RESULTS: The analysis revealed three themes that described experiences of decision making during the sick leave and rehabilitation process: Ambiguous roles challenge possibilities for moving on; Uncertain knowledge base weakens self-management; and Perceived barriers and enablers for ending sick leave. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that alternatives need to be found that address sickness absence and rehabilitation processes from a complex perspective. Collaboration between stakeholders as well as shared decision making should be considered when the time for return to work is discussed with sick-listed individuals. Other factors in the context of the individual must also be considered. Current knowledge on strategies to improve health/well-being while being in the sick leave process need to be elaborated, communicated and adapted to each individuals' unique situation, including clarifying rights, obligations and opportunities during the sick-leave process.

Development and Construct Validity of the Work Instability Scale for People With Common Mental Disorders in a Sample of Depressed and Anxious Workers: A Rasch Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sick leave due to common mental disorders, encompassing depression and anxiety disorders, is high. Capturing early signs of reduced function could aid adjustments of work tasks and environment and, thus, endorse a pro-active approach to occupational and health care interventions to prevent long-term sick-leave spells. However, few measurements exist to identify early signs of imbalance, and none that is illness-specific. The aim of this study was to develop a work instability scale for people with common mental disorders and to test the fundamental psychometric properties of the scale. METHODS: Participants were working adults 18-65 years old with depression or anxiety. The scale development started with qualitative interviews (n = 27) which informed the drafting of a dichotomous, self-report questionnaire. Cognitive debriefing (n = 12) was used to check face validity and modify the draft. Internal construct validity of the draft was tested using Rasch analysis (n = 128). The work ability index was used as a comparator measure. RESULTS: The initial 63-item draft showed poor fit to Rasch model expectations. Items displaying poor fit or local response dependency were stepwise removed, resulting in a unidimensional 34-item scale fitting the model expectations, and with no differential item functioning. Person-item threshold distribution showed that the scale is better suited to measure low to moderate work instability, than to measure high instability. Correlations between the newly developed scale and the work ability index showed a significant, moderately strong correlation. CONCLUSIONS: In the initial target sample, the 34-item scale showed acceptable fundamental properties and internal construct validity. Further validation of the scale in a larger sample, including tests for external validity, is warranted.

Rasch analysis of the Patient Participation in Rehabilitation Questionnaire (PPRQ).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the Patient Participation in Rehabilitation Questionnaire (PPRQ) according to Rasch measurement theory. METHOD: Five hundred twenty-two post-discharge patients from a neurological rehabilitation unit were included. The PPRQ questionnaire comprises 20 items rated by a cohort of 522 patients about their experiences of participating in rehabilitation. The measurement properties of the PPRQ were evaluated by Rasch analysis of the responses. RESULTS: The Rasch analysis of 20 items showed some major misfits, particularly three items addressing the involvement of family members. After removing those items, the model fit improved and no significant DIF remained. Despite improvements, person values (-2.96 to 4.86 logits) were not fully matched by the item values (-0.61 to 0.77 logits). Neither did the t test for unidimensionality meet the criterion of 5%, and local dependency was present. The unidimensionality and local dependency could, however, be accommodated for by four testlets. CONCLUSION: The PPRQ-17 showed that a ruler with a reasonable and clinical hierarchy can be constructed, although the expectations of dimensionality and local dependency need to be evaluated further. Despite room for further development, PPRQ-17 nevertheless shows improved measurement precision in terms of patient leniency compared with previous evaluations with classical test theory. In turn, this can play a crucial role when comparing different rehabilitation programs and planning tailored care development activities.

Comparison of systematic versus targeted screening for detection of risky drinking in primary care.

AIM: To compare two identification methods for risky drinking in primary health care centres (PHCs). METHODS: Sixteen PHCs from three Swedish counties were randomized into strands: consultation-based early identification (CEI) or systematic screening early identification (SS). Measurements took place at baseline and during two intervention periods. Patients filled in questionnaires including gender, age, if they had the issue of alcohol brought up during the consultation and the AUDIT-C (a three item screening tool). The intervention periods were preceded by training sessions for clinicians. The AUDIT-C was used for categorization of risky drinking with cut-offs for risky drinking set at ≥5 for men and ≥4 for women. In the SS strand, clinicians were supposed to give AUDIT-C to all patients for the identification of risky drinking. In the CEI strands, they were encouraged to use early clinical signs to identify risky drinking. RESULTS: The proportions of patients having the issue of alcohol brought up are higher during the intervention periods than baseline. A higher proportion of all patients and of risk drinkers in SS, than in CEI, had the issue of alcohol brought up. A higher mean score of AUDIT-C was found among patients having the issue of alcohol brought up in CEI than in SS, and this was also true after adjusting for age and gender. CONCLUSIONS: More patients are asked about alcohol in the SS strand and thus have the possibility of receiving brief interventions. CEI identifies risk drinkers with higher AUDIT-C scores which might indicate more severe problems. No comparison of the effectiveness of a brief intervention following these alternative identification procedures is reported here.