Worksite disability management model for effective return-to-work planning

Occupational Medicine - State of the Art Reviews

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 789-801

  Shrey, Donald E ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

^b Advanced Transitions Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DISABILITY; FEMALE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INJURY; INJURY SCALE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UNITED STATES; VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION; WORKPLACE;

DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INJURY SEVERITY SCORE; MALE; MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES; REHABILITATION, VOCATIONAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; UNITED STATES; WORKPLACE; WOUNDS AND INJURIES;

EID: 33749142355     PISSN: 0885114X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Alexander J, Fuhrer, M: Functional assessment of individuals with physical impairments. In Harlpern, A, Fuhrer, M (eds): Functional Assessment in Rehabilitation. Baltimore, MD, Paul H. Brookes, 1984, pp 45-59.
2. Brooker A, Clarke J, Sinclair S et al: Effective Disability Management and Return to Work Practices. Paper Presented at National Leadership Roundtable on Employee Health by Institute for Work and Health, Toronto, April 28-29, 1998.
3. Douglas J: Managing Workers' Compensation: A Human Resources Guide to Controlling Costs. New York, NY, Wiley & Sons, 1994.
4. Fraser T: Fitness for Work: The Role of Physical Demands Analysis and Physical Capacity Assessment. Bristol, PA, Taylor and Francis, 1992.
5. Gice J, Tompkins K: Return to work program in a hospital setting. J Bus Psychol 4 (2):237-243, 1989.
6. Graly J, Jensen G, Gibson M, Laborde T: Factors influencing return to work for clients in a work-hardening center. Work 4:9-21, 1994.
7. Hart D, Isernhagen S, Matheson L: Guidelines for functional capacity evaluation of people with medical conditions. J Orthoped Sports Phys Ther 18:682-686, 1993.
8. Innes E, Straker L: A clinician's guide to work-related assessments: I. Purposes and problems. Work 11:183-189, 1998.
9. Karuse N, Dasinger L, Neuhaser F: Modified work and return to work: A review of the literature. J Occup Rehabil 8 (2):113-139, 1998.
10. King P (ed): Concepts and Practices of Occupational Rehabilitation. New York, NY, Plenum, 1998.
11. Lindstrom I, Ohlund C, Eek E, et al: The effect of graded activity on patients with subacute low back pain: A randomized prospective clinical study with an operant-conditioning behavioural approach. Phys Ther 72 (4):279-293, 1992.
12. Moffroid M, Aja D, Haugh L, Henry S: Efficacy of a part-time work hardening program for persons with low-back pain. Work 3: 14-20, 1993.
13. Niemeyer L, Jacobs K, Reynolds-Lynch K, et al: Work hardening: Past, present, and future - the work programs special interest section national work-hardening outcome study. Am J Occup Ther 48:327-339, 1994.
14. Schmidt S, Oort-Marburger D, Meijman T: Employment after rehabilitation for musculoskeletal impairments: The impact of vocational rehabilitation and working on a trial basis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 76:950-954, 1995.
15. Shrey D: Effective worksite-based disability management programs. In King, P (ed): Concepts and Practices of Occupational Rehabilitation. New York, NY, Plenum, 1998, pp 389-409.
16. Shrey D: Disability management in industry: The new paradigm in injured worker rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 18 (8):408-414, 1996.
17. Tate D: Workers disability and return to work. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 71:92-96, 1992.
18. Voaklander D, Beaulne A, Lessard R:.Factors related to outcome following a work hardening program. J Occup Rehabil 5:71-85, 1995.
19. Yassi A: Early intervention for back-injured nurses at a large Canadian tertiary care hospital: An evaluation of the effectiveness and cost benefit of a two-year pilot project. Occup Med 45 (4):209-214, 1995.