INTRODUCTION: Individualized subjective quality of life (ISQoL) is the appraisal of quality of life according to personal values, desired goal attainment and life priorities. "Gap" is a way to operationalize ISQoL. ISQoL is rarely measured by interdisciplinary work rehabilitation (IWR) programs attended by the musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) population. These programs commonly measure pain intensity, physical capacity, perceived disability, distress and return to work. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to compare ISQoL according to work status and reference values and to explore the relationships between ISQoL and common IWR measures. METHODS: Six months after completing an IWR program, 40 working and 31 not-working participants completed questionnaires documenting work status, pain, ISQoL gap, health-related quality of life (SF-36, PCS and MCS), perceived disability and distress. RESULTS: No significant difference in global ISQoL gap was found between working and not-working participants. When compared to reference values considerable variability exists but globally, for both groups, ISQoL gap scores were below average. The following clinical variables were related to global ISQoL (P < 0.05): pain (r = -0.42), PCS (r = -0.37), MCS (r = -0.56), perceived disability (r = 0.37) and distress (r = 0.61). High distress, present in both groups, explains 38% of the global ISQoL gap variance and PCS adds 4%. CONCLUSION: Following IWR programs for the chronic MSD population, global ISQoL gap is not related to work status. The use of a client-centered interactive computerized measure of ISQoL reveals that domains related to emotional well-being are likely the most problematic for the persistently disabled MSD population.
INTRODUCTION: Individualized subjective quality of life (ISQoL) is the appraisal of quality of life according to personal values, desired goal attainment and life priorities. "Gap" is a way to operationalize ISQoL. ISQoL is rarely measured by interdisciplinary work rehabilitation (IWR) programs attended by the musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) population. These programs commonly measure pain intensity, physical capacity, perceived disability, distress and return to work. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to compare ISQoL according to work status and reference values and to explore the relationships between ISQoL and common IWR measures. METHODS: Six months after completing an IWR program, 40 working and 31 not-working participants completed questionnaires documenting work status, pain, ISQoL gap, health-related quality of life (SF-36, PCS and MCS), perceived disability and distress. RESULTS: No significant difference in global ISQoL gap was found between working and not-working participants. When compared to reference values considerable variability exists but globally, for both groups, ISQoL gap scores were below average. The following clinical variables were related to global ISQoL (P < 0.05): pain (r = -0.42), PCS (r = -0.37), MCS (r = -0.56), perceived disability (r = 0.37) and distress (r = 0.61). High distress, present in both groups, explains 38% of the global ISQoL gap variance and PCS adds 4%. CONCLUSION: Following IWR programs for the chronic MSD population, global ISQoL gap is not related to work status. The use of a client-centered interactive computerized measure of ISQoL reveals that domains related to emotional well-being are likely the most problematic for the persistently disabled MSD population.