Resources search

Work capacity assessments and efforts to achieve a job match for claimants in a social security setting: an international inventory

SENGERS, Johan H
AMBA, Femke I
BROUWER, Sandra
STAHL, Christian
2020

Expand view

Purpose: Many high-income countries are witnessing a shift of focus on eligibility for disability benefits towards promotion of work reintegration. However, little is known about how countries assess work cap- acity, and how a job match is then obtained. The current study aims to compare work capacity assess- ments and available efforts to achieve a job match in eight high-income OECD countries.

 

Methods: A survey was conducted among key stakeholders concerning organization of work capacity assessments in social security settings, and efforts made to obtain a job, across eight OECD countries: Australia, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. 

 

Results: In most countries, work capacity is assessed at several time points, with variations in moments and in information used for job matching. In countries obtaining information on personal and work levels, the search to find a job match usually begins with the persons who have disabilities.

 

Conclusion: Although a shift towards a holistic focus in work capacity assessment has been recognized, medical factors still prevail. Limited emphasis is placed on the implications of functional limitations for the possibilities of work. A holistic approach to assessment needs to be coupled with holistic support measures through provision of coordinated and high quality job matching services.

Assessing significant others’ cognitions and behavioral responses in occupational health care for workers with a chronic disease

SNIPPEN, Nicole C
DE VRIES, Haitze J
DE WIT, Mariska
VAN DER BURG-VERMEULEN, Sylvia J
BROUWER, Sandra
HAGEDOORN, Mariet
January 2020

Expand view

Purpose: To examine current practices of occupational health professionals in assessing significant others’ cognitions and behavioral responses that may influence work outcomes of workers with a chronic disease.

 

Methods: A survey study among occupational health professionals, focusing on the assessment of illness perceptions, work-related beliefs and expectations, and behavioral responses of significant others of workers with a chronic disease. We performed linear regression analyses to investigate which factors are related to occupational health professionals’ assessment practices. We used thematic analysis to analyze qualitative data on occupational health professionals’ reasons to assess or overlook significant others’ cognitions and behavioral responses.

 

Results: Our study sample included 192 occupational health professionals. Most seldom asked about significant others’ cognitions and behavioral responses. Organizational norms and occupational health professionals’ self-efficacy were related to reported assessment practices. Reasons to assess significant others’ cognitions and behavioral responses included recognizing their influence on work participation, and occurrence of stagnation. However, occupational health professionals indicated some doubt whether such assessment would always contribute to better care.

 

Conclusions: It is not common practice for occupational health professionals to assess significant others’ cognitions and behavioral responses, although they recognize the influence of these factors on work outcomes. More research is needed as to how occupational health professionals can best address the role of significant others, and apply these new insights in their daily practice.

E-bulletin