Maj Britt D Nielsen1, Jørgen Vinsløv Hansen2, Birgit Aust2, Torill Tverborgvik3, Birthe L Thomsen2, Jakob Bue Bjorner4, Ole Steen Mortensen5, Reiner Rugulies6, Glen Winzor2, Palle Ørbæk7, Trine Helverskov2, Nicolai Kristensen8, Otto Melchior Poulsen2. 1. 1 The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark 2 Oxford Research, Copenhagen, Denmark mdn@oxfordresearch.dk. 2. 1 The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. 1 The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark 3 Department for Occupational Medicine and Epidemiology, National Institute of Occupational Health, Oslo, Norway. 4. 1 The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark 4 Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark 5 QualityMetric, Lincoln, RI, USA. 5. 1 The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark 6 Department of Occupational Medicine, Køge Hospital, Køge, Denmark. 6. 1 The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark 4 Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark 7 Department of Psychology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 7. 1 The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark 8 Danish Working Environment Authority, Copenhagen, Denmark. 8. 9 KORA, Danish Institute for Local and Regional Governmental Research, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2010, the Danish Government launched the Danish national return-to-work (RTW) programme to reduce sickness absence and promote labour market attainment. Multidisciplinary teams delivered the RTW programme, which comprised a coordinated, tailored and multidisciplinary effort (CTM) for sickness absence beneficiaries at high risk for exclusion from the labour market. The aim of this article was to evaluate the effectiveness of the RTW programme on self-support. METHODS: Beneficiaries from three municipalities (denoted M1, M2 and M3) participated in a randomized controlled trial. We randomly assigned beneficiaries to CTM (M1: n = 598; M2: n = 459; M3: n = 331) or to ordinary sickness absence management (OSM) (M1: n = 393; M2: n = 324; M3: n = 95). We used the Cox proportional hazards model to estimate hazard ratios (HR) comparing rates of becoming self-supporting between beneficiaries receiving CTM and OSM. RESULTS: In M2, beneficiaries from employment receiving CTM became self-supporting faster compared with beneficiaries receiving OSM (HR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.08-1.61). In M3, beneficiaries receiving CTM became self-supporting slower than beneficiaries receiving OSM (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.54-0.95). In M1, we found no difference between the two groups (HR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.84-1.17). CONCLUSION: The effect of the CTM programme on return to self-support differed substantially across the three participating municipalities. Thus, generalizing the study results to other Danish municipalities is not warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN43004323.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In 2010, the Danish Government launched the Danish national return-to-work (RTW) programme to reduce sickness absence and promote labour market attainment. Multidisciplinary teams delivered the RTW programme, which comprised a coordinated, tailored and multidisciplinary effort (CTM) for sickness absence beneficiaries at high risk for exclusion from the labour market. The aim of this article was to evaluate the effectiveness of the RTW programme on self-support. METHODS: Beneficiaries from three municipalities (denoted M1, M2 and M3) participated in a randomized controlled trial. We randomly assigned beneficiaries to CTM (M1: n = 598; M2: n = 459; M3: n = 331) or to ordinary sickness absence management (OSM) (M1: n = 393; M2: n = 324; M3: n = 95). We used the Cox proportional hazards model to estimate hazard ratios (HR) comparing rates of becoming self-supporting between beneficiaries receiving CTM and OSM. RESULTS: In M2, beneficiaries from employment receiving CTM became self-supporting faster compared with beneficiaries receiving OSM (HR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.08-1.61). In M3, beneficiaries receiving CTM became self-supporting slower than beneficiaries receiving OSM (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.54-0.95). In M1, we found no difference between the two groups (HR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.84-1.17). CONCLUSION: The effect of the CTM programme on return to self-support differed substantially across the three participating municipalities. Thus, generalizing the study results to other Danish municipalities is not warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN43004323.
Authors: Anne-Mette H Momsen; Christina Malmose Stapelfeldt; Claus Vinther Nielsen; Maj Britt D Nielsen; Birgit Aust; Reiner Rugulies; Chris Jensen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Christina M Stapelfeldt; Merete Labriola; Anders Bonde Jensen; Niels Trolle Andersen; Anne-Mette H Momsen; Claus Vinther Nielsen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Cameron A Mustard; Kathryn Skivington; Morgan Lay; Marni Lifshen; Jacob Etches; Andrea Chambers Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-06-17 Impact factor: 2.692