Tyler J Lane 1 , Luke Sheehan 2 , Shannon E Gray 2 , Dianne Beck 2 , Alex Collie 2 Show Affiliations »
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether step-downs, which cut the rate of compensation paid to injured workers after they have been on benefits for several months, are effective as a return to work incentive. METHODS: We aggregated administrative claims data from seven Australian workers' compensation systems to calculate weekly scheme exit rates, a proxy for return to work. Jurisdictions were further subdivided into four injury subgroups: fractures, musculoskeletal, mental health and other trauma. The effect of step-downs on scheme exit was tested using a regression discontinuity design. Results were pooled into meta-analyses to calculate combined effects and the proportion of variance attributable to heterogeneity. RESULTS: The combined effect of step-downs was a 0.86 percentage point (95% CI -1.45 to -0.27) reduction in the exit rate, with significant heterogeneity between jurisdictions (I 2=68%, p=0.003). Neither timing nor magnitude of step-downs was a significant moderator of effects. Within injury subgroups, only fractures had a significant combined effect (-0.84, 95% CI -1.61 to -0.07). Sensitivity analysis indicated potential effects within mental health and musculoskeletal conditions as well. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest some workers' compensation recipients anticipate step-downs and exit the system early to avoid the reduction in income. However, the effects were small and suggest step-downs have marginal practical significance. We conclude that step-downs are generally ineffective as a return to work policy initiative.Postprint link: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/19012286. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether step-downs, which cut the rate of compensation paid to injured workers after they have been on benefits for several months, are effective as a return to work incentive. METHODS: We aggregated administrative claims data from seven Australian workers' compensation systems to calculate weekly scheme exit rates, a proxy for return to work. Jurisdictions were further subdivided into four injury subgroups: fractures , musculoskeletal, mental health and other trauma . The effect of step-downs on scheme exit was tested using a regression discontinuity design. Results were pooled into meta-analyses to calculate combined effects and the proportion of variance attributable to heterogeneity. RESULTS: The combined effect of step-downs was a 0.86 percentage point (95% CI -1.45 to -0.27) reduction in the exit rate, with significant heterogeneity between jurisdictions (I 2=68%, p=0.003). Neither timing nor magnitude of step-downs was a significant moderator of effects. Within injury subgroups, only fractures had a significant combined effect (-0.84, 95% CI -1.61 to -0.07). Sensitivity analysis indicated potential effects within mental health and musculoskeletal conditions as well. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest some workers' compensation recipients anticipate step-downs and exit the system early to avoid the reduction in income. However, the effects were small and suggest step-downs have marginal practical significance. We conclude that step-downs are generally ineffective as a return to work policy initiative.Postprint link: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/19012286. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Entities: Disease
Keywords:
regression discontinuity; return to work; workers' compensation
Year: 2020
PMID： 32220918 DOI： 10.1136/oemed-2019-106325
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Occup Environ Med ISSN： 1351-0711 Impact factor: 4.402