ArticlePDF Available

Vocational rehabilitation, case management and occupational health

Authors:
  • Independent Researcher
EDITORIAL
Vocational rehabilitation, case
management and occupational health
Vocational rehabilitation is the restoration to health and
capability to work of individuals incapacitated by mental
or physical disease, or by injury. It is high on the national
agenda. Securing Health Together [1], the Health &
Safety Executives (HSE) long-term occupational health
strategy for England, Scotland and Wales, has made avail-
ability for rehabilitation for all who require it as one of
its key 2010 targets. Further, the Partnership Board of
Securing Health Together has a stated aim of developing a
nationwide vocational rehabilitation service. The Support
Programme Action Group, as part of a model for delivery
of nationwide occupational health services, includes
rehabilitation services as one of its priorities. There have
been calls for greater emphasis on rehabilitation both
from employers and from employees’ representatives.
Each acknowledges the central role that occupational
health must play. We, in turn, as occupational health
professionals, need to be aware of the emphasis being
placed on vocational rehabilitation. We must decide
what steps we need to take so that we can answer the
challenges ahead, hopefully with evidence-based best
practice such as that in the Faculty’s guidelines for the
management of low back pain at work [2].
Provoked by the targets set out in Securing Health
Together, some of the principal stakeholders have been
voicing their opinions on vocational rehabilitation. Many
of these echo the sentiments long held and proclaimed by
‘jobbing’ occupational health professionals. Until now,
this has only been acknowledged by a few enlightened
employers or employee representatives.
In December 2001, the CBI (formerly the Confeder-
ation of British Industry) produced a report [3] entitled
‘Business and Healthcare for the 21
st
Century’. In this
report, they sought to highlight the direct cost to UK
business of sickness absence of nearly £11 billion a year,
with an overall cost to society of nearer £23 billion a year.
They suggested three ways of tackling and reducing these
costs: by businesses taking greater ownership and re-
sponsibility for the management of sickness absence;
improving the delivery of publicly funded health care; and
innovative thinking on the longer-term funding of health
care.
The CBI point out that some businesses are better than
others at managing workplace absence and employee
health care, and that best practice needs to be shared and
encouraged. This includes policies to address long-term
sickness absence. It also includes the provision of rehabili-
tation to prevent the progression of long-term sickness
absence leading to early exit from the labour market and
dependence on benefits and/or pension schemes. CBI
research has indicated that in organizations where the
responsibility for managing absence is held at a senior
level, absence rates are significantly lower. The availability
of an appropriate level of expertise of occupational health
provision is seen as key to the delivery of these policies,
acknowledging that the case load and knowledge of
general practitioners (GPs) are such that they are not
likely to see the early return to work of their patients as a
priority. In addition, National Health Service (NHS)
waiting times to see specialists or therapists, particularly
for those with musculo-skeletal conditions, act as a
delay to recovery, and have led to employers seeking trea-
tment through the private sector. The report seeks to
stimulate further research on active rehabilitation policies
and arrangements, and to promote the benefits of such
policies. In particular, it emphasizes the benefits of com-
petent occupational health provision.
The Trades Union Congress (TUC) [4] go one stage
further than advocating increased ownership of sickness
absence by employers. They call on the government to use
the forthcoming Safety Bill to give employers a legal duty
to develop a rehabilitation policy as part of their health
and safety policy. They do not believe that the Securing
Health Together target of a 30% reduction in sickness
absence caused by work-related ill-health by 2010 will be
achieved without either a legal duty on employers to plan
rehabilitation or a major expansion of the rehabilitation
services available.
From within the medical profession there have also
been contributions to the debate. The British Society of
Rehabilitation Medicine (BSRM) [5] has highlighted the
need for greater availability of active vocational rehabili-
tation. They recognize this will reduce the costs to state
and industry, reducing the numbers of those relying on
benefits and improving the quality of life for those in-
volved. It seeks greater access to vocational rehabilitation
services, recognizing the current deficiencies in the NHS,
which it sees as having lost the culture and skills required
to appreciate facilitating employment as one of its key
roles. It points out that whilst GPs certify fitness to work,
they do not practice vocational rehabilitation as perhaps
they should. It sees the ‘uneasy relationships between
GPs, hospitals and occupational health practitioners’,
with poor recognition of the potential value of occupa-
tional health services in facilitating employment rehabili-
tation. This is highlighted by a recent discussion paper
in the British Journal of General Practice [6]. The paper
acknowledges the difficulties faced by GPs in certifica-
tion of fitness to work, with little mention of the role
that occupational health could play to facilitate this. The
Occup.Med.Vol. 52 No. 6, pp.293–295, 2002
Copyright © Society of Occupational Medicine. Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved. 0962-7480/02
at University of Portland on May 23, 2011occmed.oxfordjournals.orgDownloaded from
conclusion drawn is, perhaps simplistically, that there
needs to be greater ownership of the problems by GPs,
and more training. The BSRM advocates multi-profes-
sional liaison and the adoption of the case management
approach, which it sees as being effective in assisting
individuals back to work. It encourages further education
on these issues and calls for a new Institute for Vocational
Rehabilitation Research.
Finally, the government itself is looking at rehabili-
tation issues under the auspices of the Department of
Work and Pensions (DWP). This department is currently
completing the second feasibility stage of the Job Reten-
tion and Rehabilitation pilots, with implementation
planned for 2002. An extra £12 million has been set aside
as part of the New Deal for Disabled People initiative
to look at innovative approaches to rehabilitation, by
targeting individuals at 6 weeks following certification
and looking at the overall and relative impact of three
different intervention strategies: work-focused inter-
vention; boosting health care; or a combination of the
two by random allocation and comparison with access to
usual services. The DWP’s Chief Medical Advisers Bulletin
2002 [7] contains a Desk Aid for certifying medical
practitioners, which is a summary of the key points from
the guidance document, IB 204 [8]. There is also a useful
list of evidence-based recovery times from elective
surgery and cardiac illness (e.g. post-operative recovery
time to full activity including work following open
cholecystectomy, 3–5 weeks).
There is clearly a common theme emerging: sickness
absence inflicts a heavy price on UK business apart from
the more insidious and difficult-to-quantify societal costs.
Proactive vocational rehabilitation is a fundamental step
in stemming this avoidable loss. The fact that this debate
is now on the national agenda, and that it recognizes
the important contribution of properly resourced and
committed occupational health practitioners, should be
endorsed and greeted with pride and satisfaction by the
profession. Do we take the lead or simply wait for events
to unfold?
Paul Nicholson, writing in this journal [9], has
suggested that we need to move with the times and adopt
a new consumer-focused definition of occupational med-
icine. This is to give greater clarity to our clients as to what
we actually do, where we add value and ‘what our unique
contribution is’. That definition includes the description
‘case manage people who are on sick leave, working with
community health professionals to ensure the earliest
return of functional capacity and return to work’. The
profession should embrace this definition, highlighting
our support for case management, with its greater
emphasis on active rehabilitation and the role we have to
play.
In understanding our role, our unique contribution is
being in a position to influence the employee, their health
care and the employer. We know that the reasons for
long-term absence are multi-factorial and complex [10].
They involve aspects relating to the individual and their
condition, both physical and psychosocial; the attitude
and availability of primary and secondary health care;
perceived and actual job demands; and management
attitudes. Any combination of these factors may act as
a barrier to a successful return to work. In the current
climate, one way of overcoming these barriers is by case
management. A typical model to develop with existing
clients, and to promote to potential clients, is as follows:
·
Raise the profile of rehabilitation with employers, by:
bringing to their attention the common aspirations of
the key stake holders; stimulating the development of
sickness absence policies; recognizing the importance
of rehabilitation; and defining clearly the respective
roles of management, employee, employee representa-
tives and occupational health.
·
A key role for the occupational health practitioner is to
act as an informed facilitator and influencer. Responsi-
bility and accountability for employment decisions
must remain with management, but at an appropri-
ately senior level to make a difference.
·
Promoting and agreeing a common understanding of
trigger points for involvement of occupational health,
with an emphasis on discussion at an early stage of
absence so that there is proactive management of each
case.
·
Liaison with primary care and specialists, making
them aware of the provision of occupational health
services and the availability of a phased return to
work, with restricted or alternative duties to aid with
rehabilitation.
·
Exploring with employers the business case for fund-
ing of fast-track referrals, particularly where long
waiting times exist in the NHS, e.g. musculo-skeletal
and psychological therapies.
·
Liaison with management and the employee as the
employee prepares to return to work. This includes
functional assessment to determine the physical and
psychological requirements of the job to which the
employee will return [11]. Crucially, this raises the ex-
pectation of the return to work in the mind of the
employee, and fosters a sense of responsibility and
ownership for the success of the outcome.
·
Functional capacity assessment of the individual
against the physical requirements of the job with the
involvement of specialist advice where this exists, e.g.
the Disability Service Team of the Employment Service
[12], and consideration of possible adjustments/
alternatives in keeping with the Disability Discrimin-
ation Act 1998.
·
An active graduated rehabilitation programme with the
aim of sustaining a return to work and ultimately
achieving a return to normal duties or maximum
294 Occup.Med.Vol.52, 2002
at University of Portland on May 23, 2011occmed.oxfordjournals.orgDownloaded from
potential. This may require appropriate discussion to
ensure the returning employee is not financially dis-
advantaged through a phased increase of working time,
which could prevent employees being able to return to
work, but may require considerable flexibility on behalf
of employers.
·
Regular review during the rehabilitation process to
monitor progress and understand any difficulties
encountered. This is important to avoid the process
being derailed and losing credibility, or to prevent
rehabilitation becoming institutionalized and stalled,
with loss of benefit to the employee and employer.
Ideally, monitoring should be carried out by occu-
pational health and line management.
Within this model for case management, there is
considerable scope for multi-disciplinary working, and
this reflects the sentiments of the Institution of Occu-
pational Safety and Health in their recent publication
‘Professionals in Partnership’ [13]. Proactive rehabili-
tation is no longer considered to be the extended role of
the occupational health nurse, but is now being taught as
a core function in some centres. Individual occupational
health services will need to define the respective role of
the occupational health nurse and physician, and other
occupational health practitioners. The relative level of
input will vary according to the complexity of each case
and with regard to the factors acting as barriers to a
return to work.
As occupational physicians, we need to assert our own
central role in rehabilitation, to ensure that we are well
placed to respond to the calls for the development of
services. We can best do this by influencing such initiatives
as Securing Health Together, agreeing evidence-based
and standardized functional capacity assessment tools,
contributing to research, and incorporating the findings
from ongoing research such as the Job Retention and
Rehabilitation Pilots.
David Beaumont
and
Ray Quinlan
Business Healthcare Limited
References
1. HSE. Securing Health Together. A Long-term Occupational
Health Strategy for England, Scotland and Wales. London:
Health & Safety Executive, 2000.
2. Faculty of Occupational Medicine. Occupational Health
Guidelines for the Management of Low Back Pain at Work.
London: Faculty of Occupational Medicine, 2000.
3. CBI. Business and Healthcare for the 21
st
Century. London:
CBI, 2000.
4. TUC. Restoring to Health, Returning to Work. London:
Trades Union Congress, 2001.
5. BSRM. Vocational Rehabilitation—The Way Forward.
London: British Society of Rehabilitation Medicine, 2000.
6. Sawney P. Current issues in fitness for work certification.
Br J Gen Pract 2002; 52: 217–222.
7. DWP. Chief Medical Adviser’s Bulletin 2002. London:
Department for Work and Pensions, 2002.
8. Department of Social Security. IB 204. Medical Evidence for
Statutory Sick Pay, Statutory Maternity Pay and Social
Security Benefit Purposes. A Guide for Registered Medical
Practitioners. London: Department of Social Security,
2000.
9. Nicholson PJ. Occupational medicine: new world, new
definition. Occup Med 2001; 51: 423–424.
10. Whitaker SC. The management of sickness absence. Occup
Environ Med 2001; 58: 420–424.
11. Rayson MP. Fitness for work: the need for conducting a job
analysis. Occup Med 2000; 50: 434–436.
12. The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health.
Professionals in Partnership. London: The Institution of
Occupational Safety and Health, 2001.
Editorial 295
at University of Portland on May 23, 2011occmed.oxfordjournals.orgDownloaded from
... Rehabilitation for work (vocational rehabilitation) is currently being given a high profile by many different stakeholders [2]. In order to obtain the views of key informants from a number of stakeholders, a modified Delphi study was undertaken. ...
... The observation that rehabilitation for work is high on the national agenda [2] has been borne out by the publication in the UK of a Green Paper [15], a governmental discussion paper. The focus of the document is assisting those on incapacity benefit back to work, but a significant section addresses the need for employers actively to manage return to work and rehabilitation with the involvement of good quality OH facilities. ...
... The statement gives examples of the initiatives under way which will continue to shape the development of rehabilitation for work over the next few years. It is important that OH professionals participate in these and incorporate their findings into practice [2]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Anecdotally, communication between general practitioners (GPs) and occupational health professionals is poor and acts as a barrier to successful rehabilitation for work. It is not known how widely this view is held by the many stakeholders in rehabilitation for work, or how important the observation is in its effect. A Delphi study was conducted by initial semi-structured telephone interview, followed by a three-round collation and feedback of opinion by e-mail. The 25 participants were identified by suggestion within the study process for their position as key informants within a wide range of stakeholders. The process generated a consensus statement which identifies the extremely important nature of rehabilitation for work, the crucial role by GPs, the central role of occupational health professionals in case management and the barrier represented by the often very poor communication between them. The way forward is to improve communication by mutual education and understanding and a team approach to rehabilitation strategy. This may be facilitated by the GPs who work in occupational health and disability assessment and the involvement of other health professionals to great benefit for all stakeholders.
... Li Tsang et al. [26] and Russo et al. [29] used the definition proposed by Maki [52] which includes five elements: return-to-work programme, multidisciplinary assessment, development of a plan, coordination and vocational independency. Moreover Beaumont et al. [21] published an editorial in support of the description proposed by Nicholson, who stated that case management is to "case-manage people who are on sick leave, working with community health professionals to ensure the earliest return of functional capacity and return-to-work" [53]. Lastly, Bishop et al. [22] used the description from Stapelfeldt et al. "goal-oriented approach to keeping employees at work and facilitating an early return-to-work" [54]. ...
Article
Background: Case management interventions have shown to be effective to prevent musculoskeletal pain and disability, but a single definition has not been achieved, nor an agreed profile for case managers. Objective: To describe the elements that define case management and case managers tasks for return-to-work of workers with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). Methods: A comprehensive computerized search of articles published in English until February 16, 2021 was carried out in several bibliographic databases. Grey literature was obtained through a search of 13 key websites. A peer-review screening of titles and abstracts was carried out. Full text in-depth analysis of the selected articles was performed for data extraction and synthesis of results. Results: We identified 2,422 documents. After full-text screening 31 documents were included for analysis. These were mostly European and North American and had an experimental design. Fifteen documents were published between 2010 to 2021 and of these 7 studies were published from 2015. Fifteen elements were identified being the commonest "return-to-work programme" (44.4%) and "multidisciplinary assessment/interdisciplinary intervention" (44.4%). Of 18 tasks found, the most frequent was "establishing goals and planning return-to-work rehabilitation" (57.7%). Eighteen referral services were identified. Conclusions: Despite there were several elements frequently reported, some elements with scientific evidence of their importance to deal with MSDs (e.g. early return-to-work) were almost not mentioned. This study proposes key points for the description of case management and case managers tasks.
... En åtgärd som i några studier har visat god effekt när det gäller återgång i arbete är användandet av en "case manager" (4,(124)(125)(126)(127)(128)(129)(130)(131)(132) eller "mentor", dvs en för ändamålet utbildad person vars uppgift är att stötta patienter i deras kontakter med olika aktörer; ha kunskap om hur systemet fungerar och vilka olika möjligheter som finns. "Case manager" och olika metoder för "case managment" är vanliga inom socialtjänsten i västvärlden, och har, enligt de få studier där detta prövats för sjukskrivna, haft god effekt på återgång i arbete. ...
... In the last few years, there have been calls for greater emphasis on vocational rehabilitation from employers, employees, Confederation of British Industry, trade unions, medical associations and the UK government itself [6]. This will have implications for OH professionals involved in the process of vocational rehabilitation gener- ally and with cancer patients specifically. ...
Article
Full-text available
Survivorship following diagnosis of cancer is increasing in prevalence. However, cancer survivors continue to report difficulty re-entering the workplace after diagnosis and treatment. To survey UK occupational health physicians (OHPs) regarding their role in rehabilitation of employed survivors of cancer. Following a pilot study, a questionnaire exploring opinions of OHPs regarding supporting cancer survivors' return to work was posted to all members of the UK Society of Occupational Medicine, with a repeat posting 2 months later. Responses were analyzed for significant correlations with OHP age, sex, qualification level, size of businesses advised and years of experience. There were 797 respondents (response rate 51%). Responses suggested opportunities for developing the knowledge base in relation to prognosis and functional outcomes in patients with a cancer diagnosis; instituting information resources on cancer and work for OHPs and developing communications skills training. Most respondents felt managers treated referral to occupational health (OH) differently for employees with cancer compared with management referral for employees with other diagnoses, with 45% of respondents indicating referral may take place too late to be effective in securing a return to work. A significant lack of understanding of the information requirements of employers and the role of OH by treating doctors was identified. This survey raises several possible significant barriers to return to work by cancer survivors. Recommendations to ameliorate these are made.
Article
The incidence of work-related upper limb disorders remains high. This paper explores current understanding of aetiology and management of these disorders and highlights opportunities for an increased collaborative approach within the health care team which can enhance the contribution of the work of hand therapists.
Article
Neil Robdale describes how the Enable pilot job retention project has been successfully developed into a county-wide service that aims to step in before people experiencing mental health problems become long-term unemployed and help negotiate a return to their former job. Key to the success of the service is taking referrals directly from GPs, as well as from the community mental health teams, although this requires considerable investment in promoting the service.
Article
Enable is a ground-breaking service that was piloted in Shropshire to provide support for people with mental health problems in order for them to return to their work. It began in October 2002 and proved so successful that it has been extended and refunded on a permanent basis into the future. Because of the social and economic changes over the past decade, the time appears right for occupational therapists to reinvolve themselves in the area of employment. The project leader, an occupational therapist, makes the case for this new type of vocational rehabilitation.
Article
Full-text available
Article
Full-text available
Sickness absence, or as it can be defined more precisely, absence from work that is attributed to sickness by the employee and accepted as such by the employer, remains high on the agenda for governments in the European Union (EU). Over the last decade most EU governments have implemented legislation that changes social security payments for the initial period of sickness absence.1 This has had the effect of transferring the initial cost of sickness absence away from the taxpayer to the employer, who it is thought will have more direct control over absence from work. In some countries the cost of the initial period of sickness absence has also been transferred back to the employee by, for example, removing payment for the first day or two of any new period of sickness absence, reducing the level of sickness benefit paid, and in some circumstances by changing the employment status of some groups of employees from direct employees to self employed status, where they are responsible for their own sickness absence and other labour costs. In addition many EU governments have introduced programmes aimed at encouraging long term absentees back into work and making more stringent the medical standards required for early retirement on the grounds of ill health. In Denmark, for example, the government introduced a programme called “social engagement of companies” aimed at improving the situation for long term absentees and reducing exclusion from the workplace. In Norway the government and the social partners agreed a national campaign to reduce absenteeism.2 In the Netherlands, in 1994, the Dutch government passed legislation that requires employers to engage certified occupational health services in order to help them manage sickness absence better.w1 w2 In the UK the government has taken additional steps to try to reduce absence from work …
Article
Ensuring that employees are both physically fit for work by matching their capabilities with the physical requirements of their job, and physically fit for life by promoting health-related physical activities, are important and under-utilized tools in a company's arsenal for reducing absence and ill-health retirement (IHR). Both the Health and Safety at Work Act (1974) and the Disability Discrimination Act (1995) require evidence-based approaches to setting physical and medical employment standards. Proven fitness-related strategies include redesigning the most demanding tasks, selecting and training personnel who possess the necessary physical attributes, and assessing and redeploying personnel to jobs within their capability. An essential precursor to pursuing these strategies is to conduct a job analysis to quantify the physical demands of the job.
Article
This paper explores some current issues for certifying medical practitioners in the United Kingdom (UK), particularly general practitioners (GPs), who provide medical advice to their patients on fitness for work. Medical statements that doctors use to record this advice, such as form Med 3 and form Med 4, may be used by patients as evidence to support claims for financial benefits, including Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) and state incapacity benefits. The UK employment context for sick or disabled people of working age is beginning to change, but many barriers to work retention and work resumption still exist. The UK government has embarked on a wide range of reforms that are aimed at improving work opportunities for disabled people. Research evidence on certification practice, coupled with a better understanding of the factors that can create and perpetuate sickness absence from work, suggest possible areas for reviewing clinical practice. An agenda for improving the quality of advice provided to patients of working age in the primary health care setting will need to encompass visible professional leadership, more research into current practice, and an adequately resourced programme of education for all key stakeholders.
Securing Health Together. A Long-term Occupational Health Strategy for England, Scotland and Wales
  • Hse
HSE. Securing Health Together. A Long-term Occupational Health Strategy for England, Scotland and Wales. London: Health & Safety Executive, 2000.
Occupational Health Guidelines for the Management of Low Back Pain at Work
  • Faculty
  • Medicine
Faculty of Occupational Medicine. Occupational Health Guidelines for the Management of Low Back Pain at Work. London: Faculty of Occupational Medicine, 2000.
Vocational Rehabilitation—The Way Forward
  • Bsrm
BSRM. Vocational Rehabilitation—The Way Forward. London: British Society of Rehabilitation Medicine, 2000.
Chief Medical Adviser’s London: Department for Work and Pensions
  • Dwp
DWP. Chief Medical Adviser’s Bulletin 2002. London: Department for Work and Pensions,2002
Restoring to Health, Returning to Work. London: Trades Union Congress
TUC. Restoring to Health, Returning to Work. London: Trades Union Congress, 2001.
Restoring to Health, Returning to Work
  • Tuc
TUC. Restoring to Health, Returning to Work. London: Trades Union Congress, 2001.