Advertisement

The European Journal of Health Economics

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 629–643 | Cite as

Long-term sick leave and the impact of a graded return-to-work program: evidence from Germany

  • Udo SchneiderEmail author
  • Roland Linder
  • Frank Verheyen
Original Paper

Abstract

The implementation of a graded return-to-work (RTW) program to reintegrate the long-term sick started in Germany in 1971 and has been manifested in the Social Code Book V since 1989. Based on a return plan by the physician and the insured, participants increase their working hours slowly over a specified period of time. As participants are still classified as incapable of working they still receive sick leave benefits. Using claims data from the Techniker Krankenkasse, the largest German sickness fund, the study aims at identifying participants and analyzing the full return-to-work and the impact of the RTW program. Thereby, we account for socio-economic factors, insurance-based characteristics, and medical and health-related information. We consider a possible selection bias by using individual weights to analyze determinants of length of the sickness absence by applying models for survival analysis (Cox proportional hazard model). As a main result — depending on the central assumption of unconfoundedness — sickness absence is positively related to participation in the RTW program for those with sickness absence longer than 120 days. For mental disorders, our results indicate an even stronger effect. The study results emphasize the need further promotion of this instrument among those insured, physicians and employers, as occupational health management is one key for a successful return-to-work.

Keywords

Return to work Long-term sickness Health insurance Survival analysis 

JEL Classification

C41 I13 J22 

References

  1. 1.
    Henke, K.D., Martin, K., Behrens, C.: Direkte und indirekte Kosten von Krankheiten in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1980 bis 1990 (Direct and indirect cost of illness in the Federal Republic of Germany 1980–1990). J Publ Health. 5, 123–144 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin: Volkswirtschaftliche Kosten durch Arbeitsunfähigkeit 2011 (Economic cost of work incapacity 2011). Dortmund (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bräuninger, M., Sattler, C., Kriedel, N., Völpel, H., Straubhaar, T.: Gesundheitsentwicklung in Deutschland bis 2037—Eine volkswirtschaftliche Kostensimulation (Development of health in Germany in 2037—an economic cost simulation). HWWI Policy Paper 1–6, Hamburg (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Osterkamp, R.: Work lost due to illness—an international comparison. CESifo Forum. 4, 36–40 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Høgelund, J., Holm, A., McIntosh, J.: Does graded return-to-work improve sick-listed workers’ chance of returning to regular working hours? J Health Econ. 29, 158–169 (2010)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pélissier, C., Fontana, L., Chauvin, F.: Factors influencing return to work after illness in France. Occup Med-Oxford. 64, 56–63 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vlasveld, M.C., van der Feltz-Cornelis, C.M., Bultmann, U., Beekman, A.T., van Hoedeman, M.W.R., Anema, J.R.: Predicting return to work in workers with all-cause sickness absence greater than 4 weeks: a prospective cohort study. J Occ Rehabil. 22, 118–126 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Silva-Junior, J.S., Fischer, F.M.: Long-term sickness absence due to mental disorders is associated with individual features and psychosocial work conditions. PLoS One. 9, 115885 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Markussen, S., Røgeberg, O.J.: The anatomy of absenteeism. J Health Econ. 30, 277–292 (2011)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Markussen, S., Mykletun, A., Røed, K.: The case for presenteeism: evidence from Norway’s sickness insurance program. J Public Econ. 96, 959–972 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Böckerman, P., Laukkanen, E.: What makes you work while you are sick? Evidence from a survey of workers. Eur J Public Health. 20, 43–46 (2010)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ziebarth, N.R., Karlsson, M.: A natural experiment on sick pay cuts, sickness absence, and labor costs. J Public Econ. 94, 1108–1122 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ziebarth, N.R.: Long-term absenteeism and moral hazard: evidence from a natural experiment. Labour Econ. 24, 277–292 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ziebarth, N.R., Karlsson, M.: The effects of expanding the generosity of the statutory sickness insurance system. J Appl Econom. 29, 208–230 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fevang, E., Hardoy, I., Røed, K.: Getting disabled workers back to work : how important are economic incentives? IZA Discussion Paper No. 7137. Bonn (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bratsberg, B., Fevang, E., Røed, K.: Job loss and disability insurance. Labour Econ. 24, 137–150 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Frölich, M., Heshmati, A., Lechner, M.: A microeconometric evaluation of rehabilitation of long-term sickness in Sweden. J Appl Econom. 19, 375–396 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laun, L.: Skogman Thoursie, P.: Does privatisation of vocational rehabilitation improve labour market opportunities? Evidence from a field experiment in Sweden. J Health Econ. 34, 59–72 (2014)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ziebarth, N.R.: Estimating price elasticities of convalescent care programmes. Econ J. 120, 816–844 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Øyeflaten, I., Lie, S.A., Ihlebæk, C.M., Eriksen, H.R.: Prognostic factors for return to work, sickness benefits, and transitions between these states: a 4-year follow-up after work-related rehabilitation. J Occ Rehabil. 24, 199–212 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hofmann, B.: Sick of being “activated?” : vacancy referrals and sickness absence among unemployment insurance benefit recipients. Empir Econ. 47, 1103–1127 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bürger, W., Glaser-Möller, N., Kulick, B., Pallenberg, C., Stapel, M.: Stufenweise Wiedereingliederung zulasten der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung—Ergebnisse umfassender Routinedatenanalysen und Teilnehmerbefragungen [Stepwise occupational reintegration under the German pension insurance scheme–results of comprehensive routine data analyses and participant surveys]. Rehabilitation. 50, 74–85 (2011)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bürger, W., Streibelt, M.: Wer Profitiert von Stufenweiser Wiedereingliederung in Trägerschaft der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung? [Who benefits from stepwise occupational reintegration provided under the Statutory Pension Insurance Scheme?]. Rehabilitation. 50, 178–185 (2011)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Everhardt, T.P., de Jong, P.R.: Return to work after long-term sickness: the role of employer based interventions. De Econ 159, 361–380 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Høgelund, J., Holm, A., Eplov, L.F.: The effect of part-time sick leave for employees with mental disorders. J Ment Health Policy. 15, 157–170 (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Poulsen, O.M., Aust, B., Bjorner, J.B., Rugulies, R., Hansen, J.V., Tverborgvik, T., Winzor, G., Mortensen, O.S., Helverskov, T., Ørbæk, P., Nielsen, M.B.: Effect of the Danish return-to-work program on long-term sickness absence: results from a randomized controlled trial in three municipalities. Scan J Work Env Hea. 40, 47–56 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Viikari-Juntura, E., Kausto, J., Shiri, R., Kaila-Kangas, L., Takala, E.P., Karppinen, J., Miranda, H., Luukkonen, R., Martimo, K.P.: Return to work after early part-time sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders: a randomized controlled trial. Scan J Work Env Hea. 38, 134–143 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shiri, R., Kausto, J., Martimo, K.P., Kaila-Kangas, L., Takala, E.P., Viikari-Juntura, E.: Health-related effects of early part-time sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders: a randomized controlled trial. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health 39, 37–45 (2013)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Andrén, D., Andrén, T.: Part-time sick leave as a treatment method? HEDG Working Paper 08/11. University of York (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Andrén, D., Andrén, T.: Starting sick leave part-time as a treatment method? Working Paper 10/2009. Örebro University (2009)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Andrén, D., Andrén, T.: How to evaluate the impact of part-time sick leave on the probability of recovering. Medium Econ Appl 17, 8–13 (2009)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Andrén, D.: Does part-time sick leave help individuals with mental disorders recover lost work capacity? J Occ Rehabil. 24, 344–360 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Andrén, D., Svensson, M.: Part-time sick leave as a treatment method for individuals with musculoskeletal disorders. J Occ Rehabil. 22, 418–426 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ganzeboom, H.B.G., De Graaf, P.M., Treiman, D.J.: A standard international socio-economic index of occupational status. Soc. Sci. Res. 21, 1–56 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Caliendo, M., Kopeinig, S.: Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. J Econ Surv. 22, 31–72 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    European Commission: Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC. Official Journal of the European Union. L124 20.5.2003, pp 36–41 (2003)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stuart, E.A.: Matching methods for causal inference: a review and a look forward. Stat Sci. 25, 1–21 (2010)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Verbeek, M.: A guide to modern econometrics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Chichester (2008)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Greene, W.H.: Econometric analysis, 6th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey (2008)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Austin, P.C.: A tutorial on the use of propensity score methods with survival or time-to-event outcomes: reporting measures of effect similar to those used in randomized experiments. Stat. Med. (2013). doi: 10.1002/sim.5984 Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Parmar, M.K.B., Machin, D.: Survival analysis: a practical approach. Wiley, Chichester (1995)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Allison, P.D.: Survival analysis using SAS: a practical guide. SAS Publishing, Cary (2010)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wilson, M. G.: Using SAS to assess and model time-to-event data with non-proportional hazards. Midwest SAS User Group, pp 125–2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Elixhauser, A., Steiner, C., Harris, D.R., Coffey, R.M.: Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med. Care 36, 8–27 (1998)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    van Walraven, C., Austin, P.C., Jennings, A., Quan, H., Forster, A.J.: A modification of the Elixhauser comorbidity measures into a point system for hospital death using administrative data. Med. Care 47, 626–633 (2009)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.WINEG | Scientific Institute of TK for Benefit and Efficiency in Health CareHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations