Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Models of Return to Work for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Advances in Conceptualization and Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Musculoskeletal Pain and Disability Disorders in the Workplace

Part of the book series: Handbooks in Health, Work, and Disability ((SHHDW))

Abstract

As noted in various chapters throughout this handbook, musculoskeletal pain disorders involve injury disorders of muscles, ligaments, tendons, joints, cartilage, and/or spinal discs, and they represent the most costly, disabling, prevalent, and commonly researched conditions in the workplace (Merriam-Webster, 2012; Schultz, Stowell, Feuerstein, & Gatchel, 2007; U.S. Department of Labor, 2011). However, it has been noted that comprehensive conceptual models of return to work (RTW) for these pain-related conditions are still lacking (U.S. Department of Labor, 2011). Although many researchers and clinicians from various fields, including occupational medicine, nursing, rehabilitation medicine, physical therapy, exercise physiology, physical and occupational therapy, ergonomics, engineering, psychology, vocational counseling, economics, and public health, have devoted a significant amount of time and effort into accumulating knowledge related to the prevention of musculoskeletal pain disorders and associated disability, a single theoretical framework combining these fields remains elusive. Indeed, since an earlier review article published by Schultz et al. (2007), no substantial advancements in developing an integrative comprehensive conceptual model of RTW have been made. However, the roles of fear of movement, depression, catastrophizing, and perception of injustice in musculoskeletal and other pain disorders have become better understood (e.g., Sullivan, Adams, Martel, Scott, & Wideman, 2011; Sullivan, Scott, & Trost, 2012; Wideman & Sullivan, 2012). Most recently, the role of perceived uncertainty as a key factor in formation of expectations of RTW has come to light (Stewart, Polak, Young, & Schultz, 2012), and its potential importance in the conceptualization of RTW will be explored. In this chapter, we will first discuss the current way in which RTW and disability are defined and then provide a summary of the current conceptual models. These models include the biomedical, the psychosocial, the forensic, the ecological/case management, and the biopsychosocial (see Table 24.1). The chapter will also focus on more recently articulated ergonomic models of RTW, such as the models presented by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the World Health Organization (WHO).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anema, J. R., Cuelenaere, B., van der Beek, A. J., Knol, D. L., de Vet, H. C. W., & van Mechelen, W. (2004). The effectiveness of ergonomic interventions on return-to-work after low back pain; a prospective study in six countries on low back pain patients sicklisted for 3–4 months. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 61, 289–294.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anema, J. R., Steenstra, I. A., Urlings, I. J. M., Bongers, P. M., de Vroome, E. M. M., & van Mechelen, W. (2003). Participatory ergonomics as a return-to-work intervention: A future challenge? American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 44, 273–281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, M. L., & Johnson, W. G. (1995). Labor market discrimination against women with disabilities. Industrial Relations, 34(4), 555–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, M. L., Johnson, W. G., & Butler, R. J. (1996). The error of using returns-to-work to measure the outcomes of health care. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 29, 632–641.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). The social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baril, R., & Berthelette, D. (2000). Les composantes et les déterminants organisationnels des interventions de maintien du lien d’emploi en enterprise (Rapport No. R-238). Montréal: Institut de recherche en santé et en sécurité du travail du Québec.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, A. K., Tilloston, K. M., Main, C. J., & Hollis, S. (1995). Psychosocial predictors of outcome in acute and subchronic low back trouble. Spine, 20, 722–728.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burton, A. K., Waddell, G., & Main, C. J. (2006). Beliefs and obstacles to recovery in low back pain. In P. Halligan & M. Aylward (Eds.), The power of belief: Psychosocial influences on illness, disability, and medicine (pp. 11–26). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, R. J., Johnson, W. G., & Baldwin, M. L. (1995). Managing work disability: Why first return to work is not a measure of success. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48(3), 452–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chirikos, T., & Nestel, G. (1984). Economic determinants and consequences of self-reported work disability. Journal of Health Economics, 3(2), 117–136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cocchiarella, L., & Andersoon, G. B. J. (Eds.). (2001). Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment (5th ed.). Chicago, IL: AMA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocchiarella, L., Turk, M. A., & Andersson, G. (2000). Improving the evaluation of permanent impairment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 283, 532–533.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, D. C., Mondloch, M. V., & Group, E. P. M. (2002). Listening to workers: How recovery expectations predict outcomes. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 166, 749–754.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, T. (2002). International classification of functioning, disability and health: An introduction and discussion of its potential impact on rehabilitation services and research. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 34, 201–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, A. M., & Vink, P. (2000). The adoption of technological innovations for glaziers; evaluation of a participatory ergonomics approach. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 26, 39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Droeze, E., & Johnson, H. (2005). Evaluation of ergonomic interventions to reduce musculoskeletal disorders of dentists in the Netherlands. Work, 25, 211–220.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feuerstein, M. (1991). A multidisciplinary approach to the prevention, evaluation, and management of work disability. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 1(1), 5–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feuerstein, M., & Zastowny, T. (1996). Occupational rehabilitation: Multidisciplinary management of work-related musculoskeletal pain and disability. In R. J. Gatchel & D. C. Turk (Eds.), Psychological approaches to pain management: A practitioner’s handbook (Vol. xvi, pp. 458–485). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franche, R., Baril, R., Shaw, W. S., Nicholas, M., & Loisel, P. (2005). Workplace-based return-to-work interventions: Optimizing the role of stakeholders in implementation and research. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15(4), 525–542.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Friesen, M., Yassi, A., & Cooper, J. (2001). Return to work: The importance of human interactions and organizational structures. Work, 17(1), 11–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gatchel, R. J. (1996). Psychological disorders and chronic pain: Cause and effect relationships. In R. J. Gatchel & D. C. Turk (Eds.), Psychological approaches to pain management: A practitioner’s handbook (pp. 33–52). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatchel, R. J., Peng, Y., Peters, M. L., Fuchs, P. N., & Turk, D. C. (2007). The biopsychosocial approach to chronic pain: Scientific advances and future directions. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 581–624.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gatchel, R. J., & Turk, D. C. (2008). Criticisms of the biopsychosocial model in spine care: Creating and then attacking a straw person. Spine, 33, 2831–2836.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Habeck, R., Hunt, H. A., & Van Tol, B. (1998). Workplace factors associated with preventing and managing work disability. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 42, 98–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadjistavropoulos, T., & Bieling, P. (2001). File review consultation in the adjudication of mental health and chronic pain disability claims. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 52(1), 53–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haldorsen, E., Indahl, A., & Ursin, H. (1998). Patients with low back pain not returning to work: A 12-month follow up study. Spine, 23, 1202–1208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Halligan, P. W. (2006). Beliefs: Shaping experience and understanding illness. In P. Halligan & M. Aylward (Eds.), The power of belief: Psychosocial influences on illness, disability, and medicine (pp. 11–26). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, C. A., & Dawson, K. D. (1997). Design and implementation of a participatory ergonomics program for machine sewing tasks. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 20, 429–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, R. (2002). Targeting ergonomics interventions—Learning from health promotion. Applied Ergonomics, 33, 241–249.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hendrick, H. (2003). Determining the cost-benefits of ergonomics projects and factors that lead to their success. Applied Ergonomics, 34, 419–427.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, D., Zuberbier, O. A., Kozlowski, A., Berkowitz, J., Schultz, I. Z., Milner, R. A., et al. (2002). Are components of a comprehensive medical assessment predictive of work disability following an episode of occupational low back trouble? Spine, 27(23), 2715–2719.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Imrie, R. (2004). Demystifying disability: A review of the international classification of functioning, disability and health. Sociology of Health & Illness, 26(3), 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Ergonomics Association. (2012). “What is ergonomics,” “IEA members” and “Study programs.” Retrieved from http://www.iea.cc/index.php

  • Jack, R. (2005). The effectiveness of using two different types of anti-vibration gloves compared to bare hand condition at dampening the frequencies associated with hand-arm vibration syndrome. Work, 25, 197–203.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M., Romano, J., Turner, J., Good, A., & Wald, L. (1999). Patient beliefs predict patient functioning: Further support for a cognitive-behavioral model of chronic pain. Pain, 81, 95–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, W. G., & Baldwin, M. L. (1993). The Americans with Disabilities Act: Will it make a difference? Policy Studies Journal, 21(4), 775–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, M., & Field, D. (1994). Comments on the rejection of the biomedical model in sociological discourse. Medical Sociology News, 19(3), 34–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketola, R., Toivonen, R., Hakkanen, M., Luukkonen, R., Takal, E., & Viikari-Juntura, E. (2002). Effects of ergonomic intervention in work with video display units. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 28, 18–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koningsveld, E. A. P., Dul, J., Van Rhijn, G. W., & Vink, P. (2005). Enhancing the impact of ergonomic interventions. Ergonomics, 48, 559–580.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krause, N., Dasinger, L. K., Deegan, L. J., Rudolph, L., & Brand, R. J. (2001). Psychosocial job factors and return-to-work after compensated low back injury: A disability phase-specific analysis. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 40(4), 374–392.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krause, N., & Ragland, D. R. (1994). Occupational disability due to low back pain: A new interdisciplinary classification used in a phase model of disability. Spine, 19, 1011–1020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuorinka, I., Cote, M. M., Baril, R., Geoffrion, R., Giguere, D., Dalzell, M. A., et al. (1994). Participation in workplace design with reference to low back pain: A case for the improvement of the police patrol car. Ergonomics, 37, 1131–1136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leibowitz, G. (1991). Organic and biophysical theories of behavior. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 3, 201–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leyshon, R. T., & Shaw, L. E. (2008). Using the ICF as a conceptual framework to guide ergonomic intervention in occupational rehabilitation. Work, 31, 47–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Linton, S. (2000). A review of psychological risk factors in back and neck pain. Spine, 25, 1148–1156.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Linton, S., Gross, D., Schultz, I., Main, C., Cote, P., Pransky, G., et al. (2005). Prognosis and the identification of workers risking disability: Research issues and directions for future research. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15(4), 469–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loisel, P., Buchbinder, R., Hazard, R., Keller, R., Scheel, I., van Tulder, M., et al. (2005). Prevention of work disability due to musculoskeletal disorders: The challenge of implementing evidence. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15(4), 507–524.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loisel, P., Durand, M.-J., Berthelette, D., Vézina, N., Baril, R., Gagnon, D., et al. (2001). Disability prevention: The new paradigm of management of occupational back pain. Disease Management and Health Outcomes, 9(7), 351–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loisel, P., Gosselin, L., Durand, P., Lemaire, J., Poitras, S., & Abenhaim, L. (2001). Implementation of a participatory ergonomics program in the rehabilitation of workers suffering from subacute back pain. Applied Ergonomics, 32, 53–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Main, C. J., & Spanswick, C. C. (2000). Pain management: An interdisciplinary approach. London: Harcourt Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcal, M. A., & Mazzoni, C. F. (1998). Ergonomics intervention for preventing low back pain in industry. Designing for human performance. In Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the Human Factors Association of Canada (pp. 329–332), Mississauga, ON.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCluskey, S., Burton, A., & Main, C. (2006). The implementation of occupational health guidelines principles for reducing sickness absence due to musculoskeletal disorders. Occupational Medicine, 56, 237–242.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam-Webster. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/medlineplus/repetitive+strain+injury

  • Olkin, R., & Pledger, C. (2003). Can disability studies and psychology join hands? A new model of disability. American Psychologist, 58, 296–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Panel on Musculoskeletal Disorders and the Workplace-Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education-National Research Council (NRC) and Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2001a). Musculoskeletal disorders and the workplace: Low back and upper extremities. Executive Summary, p 3, figure. ES.1. 2001. Retrieved August 27, 2012, from http://newton.nap.edu/books/0309072840/html/3.html

  • Panel on Musculoskeletal Disorders and the Workplace-Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education-National Research Council (NRC) and Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2001b). Musculoskeletal disorders and the workplace: Low back and upper extremities. Chapter II—Interventions in the workplace (pp. 301–329). Retrieved August 27, 2012, from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10032.html#orgs

  • Pohjonen, T., Punakallio, A., & Louhevaara, V. (1998). Participatory ergonomics for reducing load and strain in home care work. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 21(5), 345–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pransky, G., Shaw, W. S., Franche, R., & Clarke, A. (2004). Disability prevention and communication among workers, physicians, employers, and insurers: Current models and opportunities for improvement. Disability and Rehabilitation, 26(11), 625–634.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. P., Turk, D. C., & Loeser, J. D. (2004). Pain, impairment, and disability in the AMA guidelines. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 32(2), 315–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampere, M., Gimeno, D., Serra, C., Plana, M., López, J. C., Martínez, J. M., et al. (2012). Return to work expectations of workers on long-term non-work-related sick leave. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 22, 15–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sandstrom, J., & Esbjornsson, E. (1986). Return to work after rehabilitation. The significance of the patient’s own prediction. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 18, 29–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, I. Z., Crook, J. M., Berkowitz, J., Meloche, G. R., Milner, R., Zuberbier, O. A., et al. (2002). Biopsychosocial multivariate predictive model of occupational low back disability. Spine, 27(23), 2720–2725.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, I. Z., Crook, J., Fraser, K., & Joy, P. W. (2000). Models of diagnosis and rehabilitation in musculoskeletal pain-related occupational disability. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 10(4), 271–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, I. Z., Crook, J., Meloche, G. R., Berkowitz, J., Milner, R., Zuberbier, O. A., et al. (2004). Psychosocial factors predictive of occupational low back disability: Towards development of a return-to-work model. Pain, 107, 77–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, I. Z., & Gatchel, R. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of complex occupational disability claims: Early risk identification, intervention, and prevention. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, I. Z., Stowell, A. W., Feuerstein, M., & Gatchel, R. J. (2007). Models of return to work for musculoskeletal disorders. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 17(2), 327–352.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, J. F., & Ohrback, R. (2006). Objective and subjective measurement of pain: Current approaches to forensic applications. In G. Young, A. W. Kane, & K. Nicholson (Eds.), Psychological knowledge in court: PTSD, pain, and TBI (pp. 193–214). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, W. A., Ryser, L., Huber, E., Uebelhart, D., Aeschlimann, A., & Stucki, G. (2002). Use of the ICF model as a clinical problem-solving tool in physical therapy and rehabilitation medicine. Physical Therapy, 82(11), 1098–1107.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, A. M., Polak, E., Young, R., & Schultz, I. Z. (2012). Injured workers’ construction of expectations of return to work with sub-acute back pain: The role of perceived uncertainty. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 22, 1–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stowell, A. W., & McGeary, D. D. (2005). Musculoskeletal injury: A three-stage continuum from cause to disability to decision. In I. Z. Schultz & R. J. Gatchel (Eds.), Handbook of complex occupational disability claims: Early risk, identification, intervention, and prevention (pp. 117–139). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, M. J. L., Adams, H., & Ellis, T. (2012). Targeting catastrophic thinking to promote return to work in individuals with fibromyalgia. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 2, 130–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, M. J. L., Adams, H., Martel, M. O., Scott, W., & Wideman, T. H. (2011). Catastrophizing and perceived injustice. Risk factors for the transition to chronicity following whiplash injury. Spine, 36, 244–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, M. J. L., Davidson, N., Garfinkel, B., & Scott, W. (2009). Perceived injustice is associated with heightened pain behavior and disability in individuals with whiplash injuries. Psychological Injury and the Law, 2, 38–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, M. J. L., Feuerstein, M., Gatchel, R. J., Linton, S. J., & Pransky, G. (2005). Integrating psychosocial and behavioral interventions to achieve optimal rehabilitation outcomes. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15(4), 475–489.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, M. J. L., Scott, W., & Trost, Z. (2012). Perceived injustice: A risk factor for problematic pain outcomes. Clinical Journal of Pain, 28, 484–488.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tate, D., & Pledger, C. (2003). An integrative conceptual framework of disability. American Psychologist, 58, 289–295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tjulin, Å., MacEachen, E., & Ekberg, K. (2010). Exploring workplace actors experiences of the organization of return-to-work. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 20, 311–321.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turk, D. C. (1996). Biopsychosocial perspective on chronic pain. In R. J. Gatchel & D. C. Turk (Eds.), Psychological approaches to pain management (pp. 3–32). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turk, D. C., & Gatchel, R. J. (2000). Psychosocial assessment of chronic occupational musculoskeletal disorders. In T. M. Mayer, R. J. Gatchel, & P. B. Polatin (Eds.), Occupational musculoskeletal disorders: Function, outcomes & evidence (pp. 587–608). Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turk, D. C., & Monarch, E. S. (2002). Biopsychosocial perspective on chronic pain. In D. C. Turk & R. J. Gatchel (Eds.), Psychological approaches to pain management: A practitioner’s handbook (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J., Franklin, G., Fulton-Kehoe, D., Sheppard, L., Wickizer, T., Wu, R., et al. (2006). Worker recovery expectations and fear-avoidance predict work disability in a population-based workers’ compensation back pain sample. Spine, 31(6), 682–689.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2011). Non-fatal occupational injuries and illnesses requiring days away from work, 2010 (Publication USDL 11-1612). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Ploeg, H. P., van der Beek, A. J., van der Woude, L. H., & van Mechelen, W. (2004). Physical activity for people with a disability: A conceptual model. Sports Medicine, 34(10), 639–649.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vedder, J., & Carey, E. (2005). A multi-level systems approach for the development of tools, equipment, and work processes for the construction industry. Applied Ergonomics, 36, 147–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vink, P., Peeters, M., Gründemann, R. W. M., Smulders, P. G. W., Kompier, M. A. J., & Dul, J. (1995). A participatory ergonomics approach to reduce mental and physical workload. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 15, 389–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vink, P., Urlings, I. J. M., & van der Molen, H. F. (1997). A participatory ergonomics approach to redesign work of scaffolders. Safety Science, 26, 75–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickstrom, G., Hyytiainen, K., Laine, M., Pentti, J., & Selonen, R. (1993). A five-year intervention study to reduce low back disorders in the metal industry. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 12, 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wideman, T. H., & Sullivan, M. J. L. (2011). Reducing catastrophic thinking associated with pain. Pain Management, 1, 249–256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wideman, T. H., & Sullivan, M. J. L. (2012). Development of a cumulative psychosocial risk factor index for problematic recovery following work related musculoskeletal injuries. Physical Therapy, 92, 58–68.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. R. (1995). Solution ownership in participatory redesign: The case of a crane control room. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 15, 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF): ICF full report. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (2002). Towards a common language for functioning, disability, and health, ICF: Full report. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Retrieved August 27, 2012, from http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/training/icfbeginnersguide.pdf

  • World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). (2012). Classifications. Retrieved August 27, 2012, from http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/

  • Wunderlich, G., Rice, D., & Amado, N. (2002). Dynamics of disability: Measuring and monitoring disability for social security programs. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, A. E., Roessler, R. T., Wasiak, R., McPherson, K. M., Poppel, M. N. M., & Anema, J. R. (2005). A developmental conceptualization of return to work. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15(4), 557–568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. C2276 Eau Pleine Road, Stratford, WI, 54484, USA

    Matthew T. Knauf M.S.

  2. Counselling Psychology Program, Department of Educational & Counselling Psychology, and Special Education, University of British Columbia, 2125 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z4

    Izabela Z. Schultz Ph.D., A.B.P.P.

  3. Vocational Rehab Counsellor, GF Strong Rehab Centre, 4255 Laurel St., Vancouver, BC, V5Z 2G9, Canada

    Alison M. Stewart M.A., R.R.P.

  4. Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, 501 North Nedderman Drive, 313 Life Science Building, Arlington, TX, 96019, USA

    Robert J. Gatchel Ph.D., A.B.P.P.

Authors
  1. Matthew T. Knauf M.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Izabela Z. Schultz Ph.D., A.B.P.P.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alison M. Stewart M.A., R.R.P.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Robert J. Gatchel Ph.D., A.B.P.P.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert J. Gatchel Ph.D., A.B.P.P. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas, USA

    Robert J. Gatchel

  2. Dept of Educational and Counseling Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

    Izabela Z. Schultz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Knauf, M.T., Schultz, I.Z., Stewart, A.M., Gatchel, R.J. (2014). Models of Return to Work for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Advances in Conceptualization and Research. In: Gatchel, R., Schultz, I. (eds) Handbook of Musculoskeletal Pain and Disability Disorders in the Workplace. Handbooks in Health, Work, and Disability. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0612-3_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation