Department of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway.
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
J Occup Rehabil. 2018 Mar;28(1):170-179. doi: 10.1007/s10926-017-9708-z.
Purpose To assess effects of an inpatient multicomponent occupational rehabilitation program compared to less comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation on sickness absence in persons with musculoskeletal- or mental health disorders. Methods Randomized clinical trial with parallel groups. Participants were individuals 18-60 years old on sick-leave for 2-12 months with a sick-leave diagnosis within the musculoskeletal, psychological or general and unspecified chapters of ICPC-2, identified in a national register. The inpatient program (4 + 4 days) consisted of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), physical training and work-related problem-solving including creating a return to work plan and a workplace visit if considered relevant. The outpatient program consisted primarily of ACT (6 sessions during 6 weeks). Both programs were group based. Primary outcome was cumulated number of sickness absence days at 6 and 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcome was time until sustainable return to work. Results 168 individuals were randomized to the inpatient program (n = 92) or the outpatient program (n = 76). We found no statistically significant difference between the programs in median number of sickness absence days at 6 and 12 months follow-up. In the outpatient program 57% of the participants achieved sustainable return to work (median time 7 months), in the inpatient program 49% (log rank, p = 0.167). The hazard ratio for sustainable return to work was 0.74 (95% CI 0.48-1.32, p = 0.165), in favor of the outpatient program. Conclusions This study provided no support that the more comprehensive 4 + 4 days inpatient multicomponent occupational rehabilitation program reduced sickness absence compared to the outpatient rehabilitation program.
评估与综合程度较低的门诊康复相比,住院多组分职业康复对肌肉骨骼或精神健康障碍患者缺勤的影响。
平行组随机临床试验。参与者为年龄在 18-60 岁之间、因肌肉骨骼、心理或一般和未特指章节的 ICPC-2 中的疾病而请病假 2-12 个月、并在国家登记处登记的个人。住院康复计划(4+4 天)包括接受与承诺疗法(ACT)、身体训练和与工作相关的问题解决,包括制定返回工作的计划和如果认为相关的工作场所访问。门诊康复计划主要包括 ACT(6 周内 6 次)。两个方案均为团体基础。主要结局是 6 个月和 12 个月随访时累积的缺勤天数。次要结局是可持续返回工作的时间。
168 名参与者被随机分配至住院康复计划(n=92)或门诊康复计划(n=76)。我们发现,在 6 个月和 12 个月随访时,两组在缺勤天数中位数上没有统计学上的显著差异。在门诊康复计划中,57%的参与者实现了可持续的返回工作(中位数时间为 7 个月),在住院康复计划中为 49%(对数秩检验,p=0.167)。可持续返回工作的风险比为 0.74(95%CI 0.48-1.32,p=0.165),有利于门诊康复计划。
本研究未提供支持表明,与门诊康复相比,更全面的 4+4 天住院多组分职业康复对减少缺勤没有益处。