Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perceived Role and Expectations of Health Care Providers in Return to Work

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose Health care providers (HCPs) play an important role in return to work (RTW) and in the workers’ compensation system. However, HCPs may feel unsure about their responsibilities in the RTW process and experience difficulty making recommendations about RTW readiness and limitations. This study examines the ways in which HCPs and case managers (CMs) perceive HCPs role in the RTW process, and how similarities and differences between these views, in turn, inform expectations of HCPs. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted with 69 HCPs and 34 CMs from 4 provinces. Data were double coded and a thematic, inductive analysis was carried out to develop key themes. Findings The main role of HCPs was to diagnose injury and provide patients with appropriate treatment. In addition, the majority of HCPs and CMs viewed providing medical information to workers’ compensation board (WCB) and the general encouragement of RTW as important roles played by HCPs. There was less clarity, and at times disagreement, about the scope of HCPs’ role in providing medical information to WCB and encouraging RTW, such as the type of information they should provide and the timelines for RTW. Conclusion Interviews suggest that different role expectations may stem from differing perspectives of HCPs and the CMs had regarding RTW. A comprehensive discussion between WCB decision-makers and HCPs is needed, with an end goal of reaching consensus regarding roles and responsibilities in the RTW process. The findings highlight the importance of establishing clearer role expectations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.

References

  1. Pransky G, Katz JN, Benjamin K, Himmelstein J. Improving the physician role in evaluating work ability and managing disability: a survey of primary care practitioners. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24(16):867–874.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ratzon N, Schejter-Margalit T, Froom P. Time to return to work and surgeons’ recommendations after carpal tunnel release. Occup Med. 2005;56(1):46–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Dasinger LK, Krause N, Thompson PJ, Brand RJ, Rudolph L. Doctor proactive communication, return-to-work recommendation, and duration of disability after a workers compensation low back injury. J Occup Environ Med. 2001;43(6):515–525.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board. Guidelines for health care practitioners [Internet]. 2017. http://www.wsib.on.ca/WSIBPortal/faces/WSIBArticlePage?fGUID=835502100635000399&_afrLoop=2079797567126000&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=null#%40%3F_afrWindowId%3Dnull%26_afrLoop%3D2079797567126000%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26fGUID%3D835502100635000399%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D4f9qx5oxh_4. Accessed 24 Aug 2017.

  5. O’Brien K, Cadbury N, Rollnick S, Wood F. Sickness certification in the general practice consultation: the patients perspective, a qualitative study. Fam Pract. 2008;25(1):20–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nordin M, Cedraschi C, Skovron ML. 4 Patient-health care provider relationship in patients with non-specific low back pain: a review of some problem situations. Bailliere’s Clin Rheumatol. 1998;12(1):75–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Deyo RA. The role of the primary care physician in reducing work absenteeism and costs due to back pain. Occup Med (Philadelphia). 1988;3(1):17–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kosny A, Franche ReL, Pole J, Krause N, Cote P, Mustard C. Early healthcare provider communication with patients and their workplace following a lost-time claim for an occupational musculoskeletal injury. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(1):25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schweigert MK, McNeil D, Doupe L. Treating physicians’ perceptions of barriers to return to work of their patients in Southern Ontario. Occup Med. 2004;54(6):425–429.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Wickizer TM, Franklin G, Plaeger-Brockway R, Mootz RD. Improving the quality of workers’ compensation health care delivery: the Washington State Occupational Health Services Project. Milbank Q. 2001;79(1):5–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Soklaridis S, Tang G, Cartmill C, Cassidy JD, Andersen J. Can you go back to work? Can Fam Physician. 2011;57(2):202–209.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Kosny A, MacEachen E, Ferrier S, Chambers L. The role of health care providers in long term and complicated workers’ compensation claims. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(4):582–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Brijnath B, Mazza D, Singh N, Kosny A, Ruseckaite R, Collie A. Mental health claims management and return to work: qualitative insights from Melbourne, Australia. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24(4):766–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kilgour E, Kosny A, McKenzie D, Collie A. Healing or harming? Healthcare provider interactions with injured workers and insurers in workers’ compensation systems. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25(1):220–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mazza D, Brijnath B, Singh N, Kosny A, Ruseckaite R, Collie A. General practitioners and sickness certification for injury in Australia. BMC Fam Pract. 2015;16(100):1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kosny A, Lifshen M, Tonima S, Yanar B, Russel E, MacEachen E, et al. The role of health-care providers in the workers’ compensation system and return-to-work process: final report. Toronto: Institute for Work and Health; 2016.  

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kosny A, Lifshen M, MacEachen E, Furlan A, Koehoorn M, Beaton D, et al. What are physicians told about their role in return to work and workers’ compensation systems? An analysis of Canadian resources. Policy and Practice in Health and Safety. 2018, forthcoming.

  18. Biddle BJ. Recent developments in role theory. Annu Rev Sociol. 1986;12(1):67–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Katz D, Kahn RL. The social psychology of organizations. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lippel K, Eakin JM, Holness DL, Howse D. The structure and process of workers compensation systems and the role of doctors: a comparison of Ontario and Quebec. Am J Ind Med. 2016;59(12):1070–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Franche ReL, Cullen K, Clarke J, Irvin E, Sinclair S, Frank J, et al. Workplace-based return-to-work interventions: a systematic review of the quantitative literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15(4):607–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. MacEachen E, Clarke J, Franche RL, Irvin E. Workplace-based Return to Work Literature Review Group. Systematic review of the qualitative literature on return to work after injury. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2006;32(4):257–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kahn RL, Wolfe DM, Quinn RP, Snoek JD, Rosenthal RA. Organizational stress: studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley; 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Glaser BG. Basics of grounded theory analysis: emergence vs forcing. Mill Valley: Sociology Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Quinn PM. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. California EU: Sage Publications Inc; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. NVivo 10 [software program]. Version 10. QSR International; 2012 [computer program]. AJPE; 2014.

  28. Thomas DR. A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. Am J Eval. 2006;27(2):237–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Poland B, Pederson A. Reading between the lines: interpreting silences in qualitative research. Qual Inq. 1998;4(2):293–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory. New York: Aldine; 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Franche ReL, Krause N. Readiness for return to work following injury or illness: conceptualizing the interpersonal impact of health care, workplace, and insurance factors. J Occup Rehabil. 2002;12(4):233–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lagace RR. Role-stress differences between salesmen and saleswomen: effect on job satisfaction and performance. Psychol Rep. 1988;62(3):815–825.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Terry DJ, Nielsen M, Perchard L. Effects of work stress on psychological well-being and job satisfaction: the stress-buffering role of social support. Aust J Psychol. 1993;45(3):168–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Abramis DJ. Work role ambiguity, job satisfaction, and job performance: meta-analyses and review. Psychol Rep. 1994;75(3_Suppl):1411–1433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sohi RS, Smith DC, Ford NM. How does sharing a sales force between multiple divisions affect salespeople? J Acad Mark Sci. 1996;24(3):195–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the members of the study advisory committee who provided feedback and input at key points of the study: Dan Holland, Ann Lovell, David McCrady, Peter Rothfels, Kim Roer, Michael Zacks and Alec Farquhar.

Funding

This study was funded by the Workers Compensation Board of Manitoba through the Research and Workplace Innovation Program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Work & Health, 481 University Ave., Suite 800, Toronto, ON, M5G 2E9, Canada

    Basak Yanar, Agnieszka Kosny & Marni Lifshen

  2. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M7, Canada

    Agnieszka Kosny

Authors
  1. Basak Yanar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Agnieszka Kosny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marni Lifshen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Basak Yanar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yanar, B., Kosny, A. & Lifshen, M. Perceived Role and Expectations of Health Care Providers in Return to Work. J Occup Rehabil 29, 212–221 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9781-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9781-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation