Inpatient or outpatient occupational rehabilitation – what works best for whom? A non-randomized clinical trial

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Purpose This study compared return to work (RTW) outcomes among Norwegian patients with musculoskeletal or common mental disorders participating in a 4-week inpatient or 3-month outpatient occupational rehabilitation program to examine how program type and pre-intervention sick-leave history influenced RTW. Methods An observational cohort design that included 857 participants, categorized into five subgroups by pre-intervention absence from work. The primary outcome was time to first month without sickness absence benefits. The secondary outcome was total time without benefits. Both outcomes were assessed at 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-ups. Results The average duration on benefits pre-intervention was 6.3 months for outpatients and 10.8 months for inpatients. Pre-intervention work absence duration was the strongest predictor of RTW at both clinics. The effects of program type on RTW were time- and group-dependent. Outpatients returned to work earlier, but inpatients’ RTW rates caught up with or surpassed outpatients between 3 and 9 months after program initiation. At 10 months, outpatients again showed better RTW outcomes. Among individuals with 6 weeks through 5 months full-time benefits pre-intervention, inpatients had better RTW outcomes than outpatients. Conversely, among those on part-time benefits, outpatients had better RTW outcomes than inpatients. After adjusting for group-by-time and clinic-by-benefit interactions, inpatient participants generally had higher chances of stable RTW (> 4 weeks) at all follow-up points. Conclusion Pre-intervention duration of work absence strongly affected RTW. The effectiveness of inpatient versus outpatient rehabilitation varied by patient subgroup and time, highlighting the importance of tailoring rehabilitation to individual sick-leave histories. Trial registration: Current controlled trials https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12033424, 15.10.2014, retrospectively registered.

Article activity feed