Department of Public and Occupational Health and EMGO Institute, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Occup Rehabil. 2009 Dec;19(4):419-26. doi: 10.1007/s10926-009-9202-3.
There are substantial differences in the number of disability benefits for occupational low back pain (LBP) among countries. There are also large cross country differences in disability policies. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) there are two principal policy approaches: countries which have an emphasis on a compensation policy approach or countries with an emphasis on an reintegration policy approach. The International Social Security Association initiated this study to explain differences in return-to-work (RTW) among claimants with long term sick leave due to LBP between countries with a special focus on the effect of different disability policies.
A multinational cohort of 2,825 compensation claimants off work for 3-4 months due to LBP was recruited in Denmark, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United States. Relevant predictors and interventions were measured at 3 months, one and 2 years after the start of sick leave. The main outcome measure was duration until sustainable RTW (i.e. working after 2 years). Multivariate analyses were conducted to explain differences in sustainable RTW between countries and to explore the effect of different disability policies.
Medical and work interventions varied considerably between countries. Sustainable RTW ranged from 22% in the German cohort up to 62% in the Dutch cohort after 2 years of follow-up. Work interventions and job characteristics contributed most to these differences. Patient health, medical interventions and patient characteristics were less important. In addition, cross-country differences in eligibility criteria for entitlement to long-term and/or partial disability benefits contributed to the observed differences in sustainable RTW rates: less strict criteria are more effective. The model including various compensation policy variables explained 48% of the variance.
Large cross-country differences in sustainable RTW after chronic LBP are mainly explained by cross-country differences in applied work interventions. Differences in eligibility criteria for long term disability benefits contributed also to the differences in RTW. This study supports OECD policy recommendations: Individual packages of work interventions and flexible (partial) disability benefits adapted to the individual needs and capacities are important for preventing work disability due to LBP.
不同国家的职业性下腰痛(LBP)残疾福利数量存在显著差异。残疾政策也存在很大的国家间差异。根据经济合作与发展组织(OECD)的说法,主要有两种政策方法:强调补偿政策方法的国家或强调再融入政策方法的国家。国际社会保障协会发起了这项研究,旨在解释因 LBP 而长期请病假的索赔人在不同国家的重返工作岗位(RTW)之间的差异,特别关注不同残疾政策的影响。
在丹麦、德国、以色列、荷兰、瑞典和美国,招募了 2825 名因 LBP 请病假 3-4 个月的补偿索赔人,组成一个多国家队列。在病假开始后 3 个月、1 年和 2 年测量了相关预测因素和干预措施。主要结果测量是可持续 RTW(即工作 2 年后)的持续时间。进行了多变量分析,以解释国家间可持续 RTW 差异,并探讨不同残疾政策的影响。
医疗和工作干预措施在国家间差异很大。2 年后,可持续 RTW 范围从德国队列的 22%到荷兰队列的 62%。工作干预措施和工作特征对这些差异贡献最大。患者健康、医疗干预措施和患者特征的重要性较小。此外,长期和/或部分残疾福利资格的资格标准的国家间差异也导致了可持续 RTW 率的差异:更宽松的标准更有效。包括各种补偿政策变量的模型解释了 48%的方差。
慢性 LBP 后可持续 RTW 的国家间差异主要由应用工作干预措施的国家间差异解释。长期残疾福利资格标准的差异也促成了 RTW 的差异。这项研究支持经合组织的政策建议:针对个体需求和能力制定个性化的工作干预措施和灵活的(部分)残疾福利计划,对于预防因 LBP 导致的工作残疾很重要。