Acceptability of the eHealth Intervention Sustainable Worker Digital Support for Persons With Chronic Pain and Their Employers (SWEPPE): Questionnaire and Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: Sick leave and decreased ability to work are the consequences of chronic pain. Interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation programs (IPRPs) aim to improve health-related quality of life and participation in work activities, although implementing rehabilitation strategies at work after IPRPs can be difficult. Employers' knowledge about pain and the role of rehabilitation needs to be strengthened. The self-management of chronic pain can be improved through eHealth interventions. However, these interventions do not involve communicating with employers to improve work participation. To address this deficiency, a new eHealth intervention, Sustainable Worker Digital Support for Persons with Chronic Pain and Their Employers (SWEPPE), was developed. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the acceptability of SWEPPE after IPRPs from the perspective of patients with chronic pain and their employers. METHODS: This study included 11 patients and 4 employers who were recruited to test SWEPPE in daily life for 3 months after IPRPs. Data were collected using individual interviews at the end of the 3-month test period and questionnaires, which were completed when SWEPPE was introduced (questionnaire 1) and at a 3-month follow-up (questionnaire 2). Data were also collected on how often SWEPPE was used. Qualitative data were analyzed through a qualitative content analysis using an abductive approach. The framework used for the deductive approach was the theoretical framework of acceptability. Quantitative data were analyzed through descriptive statistics and the differences between the responses to questionnaires 1 and questionnaire 2 using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: Both patients and employers reported that SWEPPE increased their knowledge and understanding of how to improve work participation and helped them identify goals, barriers, and strategies for return to work. In addition, participants noted that SWEPPE improved employer-employee communication and collaboration. However, experiences and ratings varied among participants and the different SWEPPE modules. The acceptability of SWEPPE was lower in patients who experienced significant pain and fatigue. A high degree of flexibility and choice of ratings in SWEPPE were generally described as helpful. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows promising results on the user acceptability of SWEPPE from both patient and employer perspectives. However, the variations among patients and modules indicate a need for further testing and research to refine the content and identify the group of patients who will best benefit from SWEPPE.

Work Interventions Within Interdisciplinary Pain Rehabilitation Programs (IPRP) - Frequency, Patient Characteristics, and Association with Self-Rated Work Ability.

Background: Interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation programs (IPRPs) help people with chronic pain improve their health and manage their work; however, the way IPRPs address sick leave could be improved. Although work interventions can be a part of IPRP, it is not well known how and to what extent. Aim: This study explores the frequency of work interventions and the characteristics of patients who participate in work interventions as part of IPRP at specialist pain rehabilitation departments in Sweden. In addition, this study explores the association between participation in work interventions and change in patients' self-rated work ability after IPRP. Methods: Data from the Swedish quality registry for pain rehabilitation (SQRP), which includes 3809 patients between 2016 and 2018, were analysed with descriptive statistics and regression analyses. Results: The results indicate a high participation rate in work interventions (90%). Some differences were evident concerning characteristics of patients who participated in different work interventions. The return-to-work (RTW) plan, the most frequently used work intervention, had the strongest association with change in self-rated work ability after IPRP. However, the effect sizes were small, and the initial score best explained the change. Furthermore, there were differences between employed and unemployed patients and employment had a positive association with change in self-rated work ability. Conclusion: More research is needed to understand IPRP's mechanisms and work interventions to support patients with chronic pain, reduce sick leave, and manage work. Employment status needs to be considered and interventions should be tailored to match the individual needs.

Stakeholders' experience of collaboration in the context of interdisciplinary rehabilitation for patients with chronic pain aiming at return to work.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Chronic pain is a major reason for sick leave worldwide. Interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation programs (IPRPs), workplace interventions, and stakeholder collaboration may support patients in their return to work (RTW). Few studies have examined stakeholders' experiences of important components in the RTW rehabilitation process for patients with chronic pain, especially in the context of IPRP. This study explores and describes stakeholders' experiences with stakeholder collaboration and factors related to RTW for patients with chronic pain who have participated in IPRP. METHODS: Six focus groups, three pair and four individual interviews were conducted with a total of 28 stakeholder representatives from three societal and three health care stakeholders. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The participants revealed that stakeholder collaboration and a tailored RTW rehabilitation plan were important strategies although they noted that these strategies were not working sufficiently efficient as presently implemented. The different stakeholders' paradigms and organizational prerequisites were described as hindrances of such strategies and that the degree of tailoring depended on individual attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: More knowledge transfer and flexibility, clearer responsibilities, and better coordination throughout the RTW rehabilitation process may increase the efficiency of stakeholder collaboration and support for patients.Implications for rehabilitationStakeholders need to have a close dialogue initiated before IPRP to be able to reach consensus and shared decision making in the RTW rehabilitation plan throughout the RTW rehabilitation process.Individually tailored solutions based on a thorough assessment of each patient's work ability and context are identified during IPRP and shall be included in the shared RTW rehabilitation plan.The responsibilities of the stakeholders need to be clarified and documented in the RTW rehabilitation plan.The role of RCs should be developed to improve the coordination throughout the patients' RTW rehabilitation process.

Factors of importance for return to work, experienced by patients with chronic pain that have completed a multimodal rehabilitation program - a focus group study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To reduce the individual, societal, and economic burden of the high sick leave rates due to chronic pain, it is essential to find effective strategies for increasing return to work (RTW). Although multimodal rehabilitation programs (MMRPs) may have positive effects on RTW, the results are inconsistent. This study explores the factors that contribute to decreasing sick leave and increasing RTW in patients with chronic pain who completed a MMRP. METHOD: Four focus groups and three individual interviews were conducted. In total, 18 patients were interviewed. All patients had chronic pain and had completed a MMRP. They were either employed or unemployed, either working to some degree or fully on sick leave. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Three main categories were identified: Knowledge and understanding-prerequisites for tailored solutions; Individual adaptations-necessary but difficult to implement; and Stakeholder collaboration-needs improvement. CONCLUSION: The participants described a variety of facilitating and limiting factors that created complex prerequisites for RTW. This finding makes it clear that these patients need tailored interventions and strong collaboration among all stakeholders throughout the rehabilitation process. Tailored interventions and collaborations could improve the effectiveness of MMRPs.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONPatients with chronic pain need tailored solutions and adaptations based on their individual needs in the RTW rehabilitation process.To return to work, patients with chronic pain needs support to strengthen their selfconfidence and to be prepared with knowledge and strategies about their abilities and their rights and obligations in relation to the labour market.A well-designed and communicated RTW rehabilitation plan supports the patient in the RTW rehabilitation process.To improve the possibility for employees and employers to create a sustainable work situation, stakeholder reconciliation meetings should be held routinely over time to strengthen the transfer of knowledge and collaboration.

Interventions to facilitate return to work in adults with chronic non-malignant pain: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Work absenteeism due to chronic non-malignant pain (CNMP) is a major societal and individual cause of concern that requires effective treatments. OBJECTIVE: We present a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aiming to compare available interventions for return to work (RTW) in adults with CNMP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Knowledge and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases will be searched till 31 August 2020 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining interventions for RTW outcomes among patients with CNMP. Two independent investigators will search the databases, perform data extraction and assess the methodological quality of the selected RCTs. The primary outcome will be RTW, if possible, full-time or part-time after work absence due to chronic pain from baseline to the last available follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include self-reported workability or work capacity, or self-reported physical functioning and quality of life as measured by any validated scale. Pairwise meta-analysis and NMA will be conducted for each outcome using a random-effects model. For the primary outcomes, we will also obtain the ranking of all competing interventions within each NMA using surface under the cumulative ranking curve. The assumption of coherence (ie, that direct and indirect evidence are in statistical agreement) will be examined using both a local and a global approach. We will also conduct subgroup and meta-regression analyses, whenever feasible, to investigate the unexplained variation in effect size. The comparison-adjusted funnel plot will be used to evaluate small-study effects. The overall quality of evidence will be rated with the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis tool. Data analysis will be conducted using Stata V.16.0. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review does not require ethical approval since it will not disseminate any private patient data. The results of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020171429.