Return to Work After Surgery for Lumbar Disk Herniation: A Nationwide registry-based Study.

STUDY DESIGN: An observational registry-based study. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the long-term patterns of sick leave among patients undergoing surgery for lumbar disk herniation using two nationwide databases to study the achievement of post-surgery return to work (RTW). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The ability to RTW is increasingly recognized as an essential outcome measure for spine surgery. METHODS: The study included 13,698 patients aged 18 to 60 on sick leave undergoing surgery for lumbar disk herniation from January 2007 through January 2019. Data from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery (NORspine) and the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (NAV) were linked. Certified sick leave around the time of surgery was assessed. The patients were further categorized according to the length of pre-surgery sick leave, and the rate of sustainable RTW for the different groups was compared using survival analysis. The association between successful surgical outcomes, defined by a 30% improvement in Oswestry Disability Index score, and achievement of sustainable RTW was analyzed using a logistic regression model. RESULTS: Two years after surgery, 76% of the patients had returned to work. Shorter pre-surgery sick leave was associated with a higher proportion and rate of achieved sustainable RTW: Among patients with sick leave of less than 30 days, a total of 99% achieved sustainable RTW (median 46 d); only 40% of patients with longer-lasting work assessment allowance achieved the same goal within two years. Successful surgical outcomes were associated with sustainable RTW for all patient groups, but the impact of surgical success on RTW declined as sick leave extended beyond 180 days. CONCLUSION: Most patients had returned to work two years after lumbar disk herniation surgery. Shorter pre-surgery sick leave was associated with achieving faster and more sustainable RTW. Successful surgical outcomes had less impact on patients with extended sick leave. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Measuring the Effect of the Early assessment Team (MEET) for patients referred to outpatient mental health care: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Referrals to specialised mental health care (such as community mental health centres; CMHC) have increased over the last two decades. Patients often have multifaceted problems, which cannot only be solved by such care. Resources are limited, and triaging is challenging. A novel method which approaches patients early and individually upon referral to a CMHC-possibly with a brief intervention-is an Early assessment Team (EaT). In an EaT, two therapists meet the patient early in the process and seek to solve the present problem, often involving community services, primary health care, etc.; attention is paid to symptoms and functional strife, rather than diagnoses. This is in contrast to treatment as usual (TAU), where the patient (after being on a waiting list) meets one therapist, who focuses on history and situation to assign a diagnosis and eventually start a longitudinal treatment. The aim of this study is to describe and compare EaT and TAU regarding such outcomes as work and social adjustment, mental health, quality of life, use of health services, and patient satisfaction. The primary outcome is a change in perceived function from baseline to 12-month follow-up, measured by the Work and Social Adjustment Scale. METHOD: Patients (18 years and above; n = 588) referred to outpatient health care at a CMHC are randomised to EaT or TAU. Measures (patient self-reports and clinician reports, patients' records, and register data) are collected at baseline, after the first and last meeting, and at 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 months after inclusion. Some participants will be invited to participate in qualitative interviews. TRIAL DESIGN: The study is a single-centre, non-blinded, RCT with two conditions involving a longitudinal and mixed design (quantitative and qualitative data). DISCUSSION: This study will examine an intervention designed to determine early on which patients will benefit from parallel or other measures than assessment and treatment in CMHC and whether these will facilitate their recovery. Findings may potentially contribute to the development of the organisation of mental health services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05087446. Registered on 21 October 2021.

Prospects of returning to work after lumbar spine surgery for patients considering disability pension: a nationwide study based on data from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the odds for not returning to work (non-RTW) 1 year after treatment among patients who had applied for or were planning to apply for disability pension (DP-applicant) prior to an operation for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine. METHODS: This population-based cohort study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine surgery included 26 688 cases operated for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine from 2009 to 2020. The primary outcome was RTW (yes/no). Secondary patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were the Oswestry Disability Index, Numeric Rating Scales for back and leg pain, EuroQoL five-dimension and the Global Perceived Effect Scale. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate associations between being a DP-applicant prior to surgery (exposure), possible confounders (modifiers) at baseline and RTW 12 months after surgery (outcome). RESULTS: The RTW ratio for DP-applicants was 23.1% (having applied: 26.5%, planning to apply 21.1%), compared with 78.6% among non-applicants. All secondary PROMs were more favourable among non-applicants. After adjusting for all significant confounders (low expectations and pessimism related to working capability, not feeling wanted by the employer and physically demanding work), DP-applicants with under 12 months preoperative sick leave had 3.8 (95% CI 1.8 to 8.0) higher odds than non-applicants for non-RTW 12 months after surgery. The subgroup having applied for disability pension had the strongest impact on this association. CONCLUSION: Less than a quarter of the DP-applicants returned to work 12 months after surgery. This association remained strong, also when adjusted for the confounders as well as other covariates related RTW.

Who Returns to work? Exploring the Role of Interpersonal Problems in Occupational Rehabilitation.

PURPOSE: Current interventions designed to facilitate return to work (RTW) after long-term sick leave show weak effects, indicating the need for new approaches to the RTW process. The importance of social relationships in the workplace is widely recognized in existing RTW literature, but very little is known about the role of the interpersonal problems of the returning worker. Current research indicates that a subset of these - hostile-dominant interpersonal problems - give particular disadvantages in several life areas. This prospective cohort study aims to test whether higher levels of interpersonal problems predict lower likelihood of RTW when controlling for symptom levels (H1); and whether higher levels of hostile-dominant interpersonal problems specifically predict lower likelihood of RTW (H2). METHODS: 189 patients on long-term sick leave completed a 3½-week transdiagnostic RTW program. Before treatment, self-reported interpersonal problems, chronic pain, insomnia, fatigue levels, anxiety and depression were collected. RTW data for the following year were collected from the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. RESULTS: A multivariable binary logistic regression analysis found that (H2) hostile-dominant interpersonal problems significantly predicted RTW (OR = 0.44, [95% CI: 0.19, 0.98], p = .045), while a corresponding analysis (H1) found that general interpersonal problems did not. CONCLUSION: Hostile-dominant interpersonal problems negatively predict RTW after long-term sick leave, suggesting an overlooked factor in the field of occupational rehabilitation. The findings could open up new avenues for research and interventions entailed to individuals in the field of occupational rehabilitation.

Return to Work after Surgical Clipping versus Endovascular Treatment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Nationwide Registry-Based Study.

PURPOSE: To assess return to work following the treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective, nationwide registry-based study included all adult patients of working age treated for a UIA in Norway between 2008 and 2018 who had a record of sickness leave on the day of treatment. Data from The Norwegian Patient Registry and The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration were linked on an individual level. Daily sickness and recipiency of disability benefits, as an indirect measure of working status, from 1 year before treatment to 1 year after treatment were analyzed. Return to work after endovascular treatment and surgical clipping was compared. RESULTS: In total, 412 patients were included. Of patients who worked 1 year before treatment, 83% returned to work 1 year after treatment. The number of days from treatment to the first day back at work in a continuous 3-month working period was lower in patients who underwent endovascular treatment than in those treated with surgical clipping (median, 69 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], 51-87; vs 201 days, 95% CI, 163-239; P < .001). Return to work was more likely in patients who underwent endovascular treatment at 3 months after treatment (hazard ratio, 3.53; 95% CI, 2.54-4.93; P < .001). There was no difference in return to work at 6 and 12 months after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of UIAs affects patients' postoperative working status. Patients treated endovascularly return to work earlier than those who undergo open surgery.

Return to work after surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a nationwide registry-based observational study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies of high quality exist on return to work (RTW) rate after surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). This study aims to examine the RTW rate in patients undergoing surgery for DCM. METHODS: Nationwide prospectively collected data were obtained from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery and the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. The primary outcome was return to work, defined as being at work at a given time postoperatively without any medical income-compensation benefits. Secondary endpoints included the neck disability index (NDI) and quality of life measured by EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D). RESULTS: Among 439 patients operated for DCM between 2012 and 2018, 20% of the patients received a medical income-compensation benefit one year before surgery. This number increased steadily towards the operation at which timepoint 100% received benefits. By 12 months after surgery, 65% had returned to work. By 36 months, 75% had returned to work. Patients that returned to work were more likely to be non-smokers and to have a college education. They had less comorbidity, more were without benefit 1-year pre-surgery, and significantly more patients were employed at operation date. Average days of sick leave in the year before surgery were significantly less in the RTW group, and they had a significantly lower baseline NDI and EQ-5D All PROMs reached statistical significance at 12 months, in favor of the group that achieved RTW. CONCLUSION: At 12 months following surgery, 65% had returned to work. At the end of the 36-month follow-up period, 75% had returned to work, 5% less than the working percentage in the beginning of the follow-up period. This study demonstrates that a large percentage of patients return to work after surgical treatment for DCM.

Return to work after surgical clipping versus endovascular treatment for ruptured intracranial aneurysms - A nationwide registry-based study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess return to work following aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) and compare working status after open surgical clipping and endovascular treatment. METHODS: This nationwide registry-based study included all adult patients in working age treated for a ruptured intracranial aneurysm in Norway between 2008 and 2018 who had a record of sickness leave on the day of treatment. Data from The Norwegian Patient Registry and The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration were linked on an individual level. Daily sickness and disability benefits recipiency one year preoperatively to one year postoperatively was analysed. Return to work after endovascular treatment and surgical clipping was compared. RESULTS: 183 patients were included in the study. Among patients who worked at one year preoperatively, 57% had returned to work one year after treatment. Mean number of days from treatment to the first day back at work in a continuous 3-month working period was 298 (95% CI: 276-321) vs. 319 (95% CI: 299-339) for patients who underwent endovascular treatment compared to patients treated with clipping (p = 0.365). Older patients were less likely to return to work after treatment (hazard ratio 0.977 per year of age, 95% CI 0.956-1.000, p = 0.046). There was no significant association between return to work and patient sex or location of the aneurysm. CONCLUSIONS: Aneurysmal SAH profoundly affects patient working status. This study found no significant difference in time to return to work after treatment between patients treated with endovascular techniques compared to patients undergoing open surgery.

Participants' experiences from group-based treatment at multidisciplinary pain centres - a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to explore the experiences of participants in non-pharmacological group-based treatments delivered as part of a randomised controlled trial at Norwegian tertiary care pain centres. METHODS: Individual semi-structured interviews with 15 persons were conducted. The data were analysed with a descriptive thematic cross-case analysis based on the method of systematic text condensation. RESULTS: All participants talked about some aspects of the group-based treatments as a positive experience, but mainly the outcome was in line with their expectations; they hoped it would reduce their pain but did not expect it. There were no clear-cut differences in the experiences between the participants from the two different intervention groups. The content was experienced as both relevant and interesting but also to introduce concepts that were difficult to grasp and understand. Similarly, the experiences of participating in a group-based treatment were mostly stimulating but could also be challenging because of an expectancy of sharing personal stories. Although experiencing few changes to their pain they came away with techniques and lessons that were valuable to them. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, taking part in group-based treatment was perceived as giving positive and valuable lessons, due to relevant content and learning from the professionals and fellow participants, but without any clear indication of reduced pain. Approval from ethical committee number 10260 REK Midt. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04057144.

Barriers and Facilitators for Implementing Motivational Interviewing as a Return to Work Intervention in a Norwegian Social Insurance Setting: A Mixed Methods Process Evaluation.

Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate potential barriers and facilitators for implementing motivational interviewing (MI) as a return to work (RTW) intervention in a Norwegian social insurance setting. Methods A mixed-methods process evaluation was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial involving MI sessions delivered by social insurance caseworkers. The study was guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework using focus groups with the caseworkers. MI fidelity was evaluated through audio-recordings of MI sessions and questionnaires to sick-listed participants. Results Lack of co-worker and managerial support, time and place for practicing to further develop MI skills, and a high workload made the MI intervention challenging for the caseworkers. The MI method was experienced as useful, but difficult to master. MI fidelity results showed technical global scores over the threshold for "beginning proficiency" whereas the relational global score was under the threshold. The sick-listed workers reported being satisfied with the MI sessions. Conclusions Despite caseworker motivation for learning and using MI in early follow-up sessions, MI was hard to master and use in practice. Several barriers and facilitators were identified; these should be addressed before implementing MI in a social insurance setting.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03212118 (registered July 11, 2017).

Biopsychosocial predictors and trajectories of work participation after transdiagnostic occupational rehabilitation of participants with mental and somatic disorders: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Group-based transdiagnostic occupational rehabilitation programs including participants with mental and somatic disorders have emerged in clinical practice. Knowledge is sparse on subsequent participation in competitive work. This study aimed to investigate trajectories for (re)entry to work for predefined subgroups in a diagnostically heterogeneous sample of sick-listed participants after completing occupational rehabilitation. METHODS: A cohort of 212 participants aged 18-69 on long-term sick leave (> 8 weeks) with chronic pain, chronic fatigue and/or common mental disorders was followed for one year after completing a 3½-week rehabilitation intervention based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Self-reported, clinical and registry data were used to study the associations between predefined biopsychosocial predictors and trajectories for (re)entry to competitive work (≥ 1 day per week on average over 8 weeks). Generalized estimating equations analysis was used to investigate trajectories. RESULTS: For all biopsychosocial subgroups (re)entry to work increased over time. Baseline employment, partial sick leave and higher expectation of return to work (RTW) predicted higher probability of having (re)entered work at any given time after discharge. The odds of increasing reentry over time (statistical interaction with time) was weaker for the group receiving the benefit work assessment allowance compared with those receiving sickness benefit (OR = 0.92, p = 0.048) or for those on partial sick leave compared with full sick leave (OR 0.77, p < 0.001), but higher for those who at baseline had reported having a poor economy versus not (OR 1.16, p = 0.010) or reduced emotional functioning compared with not (OR 1.11, p = 0.012). Health factors did not differentiate substantially between trajectories. CONCLUSIONS: Work participation after completing a transdiagnostic occupational rehabilitation intervention was investigated. Individual and system factors related to work differentiated trajectories for (re)entry to work, while individual health factors did not. Having a mental disorder did not indicate a worse prognosis for (re)entry to work following the intervention. Future trials within occupational rehabilitation are recommended to pivot their focus to work-related factors, and to lesser extent target diagnostic group.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Adding Telephone Follow-Up to an Occupational Rehabilitation Program to Increase Work Participation.

Purpose Transfer from on-site rehabilitation to the participant's daily environment is considered a weak link in the rehabilitation chain. The main objective of this study is to see if adding boosted telephone follow-up directly after completing an occupational rehabilitation program effects work participation. Methods A randomized controlled study included participants with chronic pain, chronic fatigue or common mental disorders on long-term sick leave. After completing 3½ weeks of acceptance and commitment therapy based occupational rehabilitation, participants were randomized to boosted follow-up or a control group before returning to their daily environment. The intervention was delivered over 6 months by on-site RTW coordinators mainly via telephone. Primary outcome was RTW categorized as participation in competitive work ≥1 day per week on average over 8 weeks. Results There were 213 participants of mean age 42 years old. Main diagnoses of sick leave certification were mental disorders (38%) and musculoskeletal disorders (30%). One year after discharge the intervention group had 87% increased odds (OR 1.87, 95% confidence interval 1.06-3.31, p = 0.031), of (re)entry to competitive work ≥1 day per week compared with the controls, with similar positive results for sensitivity analysis of participation half time (≥2.5 days per week). The cost of boosted follow-up was 390.5 EUR per participant. Conclusion Participants receiving boosted RTW follow-up had higher (re)entry to competitive work ≥1 day per week at 1 year when compared to the control group. Adding low-cost boosted follow-up by telephone after completing an occupational rehabilitation program augmented the effect on return-to-work.

Transdiagnostic group-based occupational rehabilitation for participants with chronic pain, chronic fatigue and common mental disorders. A feasibility study.

PURPOSE: The aim was to investigate the feasibility of introducing a novel transdiagnostic occupational rehabilitation program delivered in groups mixing participants with chronic pain, chronic fatigue and common mental disorders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational data on group climate and individual participation were triangulated with qualitative data from focus group interviews on the participants' experiences with transdiagnostic groups. RESULTS: The study included 222 participants receiving a temporary work disability benefit. Self-reported chronic pain (75%), chronic fatigue (79%), and mental distress (62%) were prevalent and the majority reported overlapping conditions (78%). Program completion among participants was high (96%). Those completing participated actively (95%) in the program. Overall group climate was stable with moderately high engagement. Participants with clinically confirmed mental disorders (22%) showed similar outcomes. Self-reported problems with "working in a group" prior to rehabilitation were not associated with how participants experienced group climate. Qualitative data supported the findings of positive participant experiences with transdiagnostic group settings. CONCLUSIONS: Transdiagnostic groups showed high participation rates, moderately high group engagement across symptom profiles and positive participant experiences. Implementing transdiagnostic occupational rehabilitation in groups mixing participants with chronic pain, chronic fatigue and common mental disorders was feasible and acceptable to participants. Implications for rehabilitation Most research has been done on disorder-specific occupational rehabilitation programs, but emerging evidence supports a more generic approach. Transdiagnostic therapies, such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), have shown promising results for both somatic and mental disorders. The feasibility of implementing transdiagnostic rehabilitation groups, their acceptability to participants and the demand for such groups has not been established. This study indicates that it is feasible to introduce a novel transdiagnostic group-based occupational rehabilitation program for mixed groups of sick-listed participants with chronic pain, chronic fatigue and/or common mental disorders.

National guidelines for evaluating pain-Patients' legal right to prioritised health care at multidisciplinary pain clinics in Norway implemented 2009.

Background All nations are posed with the challenge of deciding how to allocate limited health care resources. A Patients' Rights Law from 1999 gives patients in Norway with a serious health condition, for which there is efficacious and cost-effective treatment, a legal right to receive health care from the National Health Care system. Methods Recently national guidelines have been produced for implementing these legal rights within 32 fields of specialist health care. One of these fields deals with serious chronic pain conditions. A task force established by the Directorate of Health, comprising pain specialists, primary care and patient representatives, have produced guidelines for pain conditions. The newly published guidelines seek to answer the difficult questions of which patients should be prioritised at pain clinics and what is a medically acceptable waiting time. Results The guidelines deal with non-acute pain conditions that are too complex for primary care and organ- or disease-specific fields of specialist care. The guidelines state that if health-related quality of life is severely affected by the pain condition and efficacious and cost-effective treatment is available, then patients have a legal right to receive prioritised specialist health care in multidisciplinary pain clinics. The guidelines describe 5 categories of complex pain disorders that as a main rule should be given the right to prioritised health care in pain clinics. The 5 categories are Category 1 Sub-acute (≤6 months) pain conditions with reason to fear chronification. Maximum waiting time 2 weeks, e.g., progressing complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) 5 months after an ankle-fracture. Category 2 Chronic complex pain condition, with or without known initiating cause, combined with substance abuse and/or psychiatric illness. These patients need concomitant follow-up by psychiatric and/or addiction medicine department(s) and a multidisciplinary pain clinic approach. Maximum waiting time 16 weeks, e.g., CRPS of an arm combined with depression and addiction to heroin. Category 3 Chronic complex pain condition WITH known initiating cause (that can no longer be treated with a curative approach). Maximum waiting time 16 weeks, e.g., Post-herpetic neuralgia. Category 4 Chronic complex pain condition WITHOUT known initiating cause. Maximum waiting time 16 weeks, e.g., chronic muscle pain syndrome. Category 5 Severe and difficult to treat pain condition in patients suffering from a known serious and advanced illness. Maximum waiting time 2 weeks, e.g., advanced cancer, COLD, heart failure, end stage multiple sclerosis. The maximum medically accepted waiting time is set at either 2 or 16 weeks depending on the condition. The full version of the guidelines describes pain categories in detail and gives information on cases that do not qualify to be prioritised for care in a pain clinic. Conclusions Norwegian national guidelines for prioritising among pain conditions are in the process of being implemented. Epidemiologic data and expert opinion suggest that in order to meet the chronic pain patient's legal claim to prioritised specialist health care, the national health care system in Norway will have to establish new pain clinics and increase capacity at existing pain clinics.