Resources search

Coordination of return-to-work for employees on sick leave due to common mental disorders: facilitators and barriers

HOLMLUND, Lisa
HELLMAN, Therese
ENGBLOM, Monika
KWAK, Lydia
SANDMAN, Lars
TöRMKVIST, Lena
BRäMBERG, Elizabeth Björk
December 2020

Expand view

Purpose: To identify facilitators of and barriers to the coordination of return-to-work between the primary care services, the employee, and the employers from the perspective of coordinators and employees on sick leave due to common mental disorders (CMDs).Material and methods:

 

Descriptive qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eighteen coordinators and nine employees on sick leave due to CMDs. The Consolidated Framework for implementation Research (CFIR) was used as a starting point for the interview guides and in the thematic analysis of data.

 

Results: The results show facilitators and barriers related to the CFIR domains“intervention characteristics,” outer setting,” inner setting,” and“characteristics of individuals.”Positive attitudes, an open dialogue in a three-party meeting, and a common ground for the sick leave process at the primary care centre facilitated coordination, while an unclear packaging, conflicts at the employee’s workplace, and a lack of team-based work were examples of barriers.

 

Conclusion: The results indicate a need for the detailed packaging of coordination; formalization of coordinators’ qualifications and levels of training; and acknowledgment of the role of organizational factors in the implementation of coordination. This is important to further develop and evaluate the efficacy of coordination.

Expectations management; employer perspectives on opportunities for improved employment of persons with mental disabilities in Kenya

EBUENYI, Ikenna D
VAN DER HAM, Aida J
BUNDERS-AELEN, Joske F G
REGEER, Barbara J
January 2019

Expand view

Purpose: In Kenya, the employment rate for persons with disabilities is about 1% compared to 73.8% for the general population, and the situation is even worse for persons with mental disabilities. Persons with mental disabilities are often regarded as “mad”, and stand little or no chance of employment. We undertook an exploratory study with employers and potential employers to understand factors that hinder or facilitate their employment and to gain insight into employers’ perceptions of mental disability.

 

Materials and methods: We adopted a mixed method study design, including in-depth interviews (n = 10) and questionnaires (n = 158) with (potential) employers in Kenya to explore the barriers and facilitators of employment for persons with mental disabilities.

 

Results: Out of the 158 employers who completed the questionnaire, only 15.4% had ever employed persons with mental disabilities. The perceptions that these persons are not productive and may be violent was associated with an unwillingness to employ them (OR: 10.11, 95%CI: 2.87–35.59 and OR: 3.6, 95%CI: 1.34–9.64, respectively). The possession of skills was the highest reported facilitator of employing persons with mental disabilities. Employers suggested that information about mental illness and the disclosure by prospective employees with mental disabilities are relevant for the provision of reasonable accommodation in the workplace.

 

Conclusion: Possession of skills and disclosure by persons with mental disabilities could improve their employability. Information targeted at all actors including employers, employees, government, and policymakers is necessary for balancing employers and employees expectations.

Nationwide implementation of a national policy for evidence-based rehabilitation with focus on facilitating return to work: a survey of perceived use, facilitators, and barriers

BJORK BRAMBERG, Elisabeth
JENSEN, Irene
KWAK, Lydia
October 2018

Expand view

Aim: The aim is to assess whether the national policy for evidence-based rehabilitation with a focus on facilitating return-to-work is being implemented in health-care units in Sweden and which factors influence its implementation.

 

Methods: A survey design was used to investigate the implementation. Data were collected at county council management level (process leaders) and clinical level (clinicians in primary and secondary care) using web surveys. Data were analyzed using SPSS, presented as descriptive statistics.

 

Results: The response rate among the process leaders was 88% (n = 30). Twenty-eight percent reported that they had already introduced workplace interventions. A majority of the county councils’ process leaders responded that the national policy was not clearly defined. The response rate among clinicians was 72% (n = 580). Few clinicians working with patients with common mental disorders or musculoskeletal disorders responded that they were in contact with a patient’s employer, the occupational health services or the employment office (9–18%). Nearly, all clinicians responded that they often/always discuss work-related problems with their patients.

 

Conclusions: The policy had been implemented or was to be implemented before the end of 2015. Lack of clearly stated goals, training, and guidelines were, however, barriers to implementation.

The autism employment gap report

The National Autistic Society
September 2016

Expand view

For nearly a decade, the full-time employment rate of autistic adults has stagnated. A survey we carried out in 2007 indicated that just 15% of autistic people were in full-time paid work. Shockingly, in this year’s survey, the figure was just 16%.

 

A similar number are in part-time employment, giving an overall employment rate of 32%. And while full-time work won’t be right for everyone on the autism spectrum, four in 10 of those working part-time feel under-employed. Others feel they are in low-skilled work and employers don’t see their abilities. They see their autism. They see a problem.

 

Meanwhile, employers have told us that they are worried about getting things wrong for autistic employees and that they don’t know where to go for advice. Autistic people are overloaded by too much information at work, and employers don’t have enough.

 

The UK Government has made a very welcome pledge to halve the disability employment gap by the end of this Parliament, meaning that they have to shift the disability employment rate from 47% to 64%. But the autism employment gap is even wider. For the number of autistic people in work to reach 64%, the Government will need to commit to doubling the number of autistic people in employment by 2020.

 

Both Government and employers need to take specific action to make this happen – without it, recent history tells us that autistic people will continue to be left behind

E-bulletin