Advertisement

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 522–531 | Cite as

Gender Differences in Personal and Work-Related Determinants of Return-to-Work Following Long-Term Disability: A 5-Year Cohort Study

  • Valérie LedererEmail author
  • Michèle Rivard
  • Samia Djemaa Mechakra-Tahiri
Article

Abstract

Objective To assess the differential effect of personal and work-related psychosocial, physical and organizational determinants by gender on time to return-to-work (RTW) following long-term disability. Methods Data come from a larger study conducted in the province of Quebec, Canada. A cohort of 455 adults on long-term disability due to work-related musculoskeletal disorders at the back/neck/upper limb was followed for 5 years through structured interviews and administrative databases. Left-truncated Cox regression modeling stratified by gender was used to assess time to a first partial or full RTW of at least 3 days. Results Survival curves of time to RTW were similar between men and women on long-term disability (log-rank test p value = 0.920) but many personal and occupational factors influencing RTW differed by gender. Women’s risk factors included older age (HR = 0.734—in 10 years unit), poor to very poor perceived economic status (HR = 0.625), working ≥40 h/week and having dependents (HR = 0.508) and awareness of workplace-based occupational health and safety program (HR = 0.598); higher gross annual income (in $10,000 s) was a facilitator (HR = 1.225). In men, being over 55 years old (HR = 0.458), poor perceived economic status (HR = 0.653), working ≥40 h/week and high perceived physical workload (HR = 0.720) and higher job insecurity (HR = 0.825) negatively influenced time to RTW. For both men and women, probabilities of not returning to work varied widely according to workers’ specific profile of personal and occupational factors (high or low risk profile). Conclusion Results confirm the importance of gender-sensitive strategies to investigate RTW determinants from a gender perspective.

Keywords

Sex Gender Return-to-work Prolonged Chronic Sickness absence 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The study was supported by the Robert-Sauvé Occupational Health and Safety Research Institute (IRSST—#0099-2820). V.L. was supported by a Banting and Best Doctoral Research Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and a Doctoral Scholarship from the Robert-Sauvé Occupational Health and Safety Research Institute.

References

  1. 1.
    Brooks PM. The burden of musculoskeletal disease: a global perspective. Clin Rheumatol. 2006;25(6):778–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Commission de la Santé et Sécurité du Travail. Statistics on inflammations of the musculoskeletal system: 2004–2007 [Statistiques sur les lésions en “ite” du système musculo-squelettique: 2004–2007]. Quebec, CSST; 2008.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Commission de la Santé et Sécurité du Travail. Statistics on vertebral disorders: 2004–2007 [Statistiques sur les affections vertébrales: 2004–2007]. Quebec, CSST; 2008.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Henderson M, Glozier N, Elliott KH. Long term sickness absence. BMJ. 2005;330(7495):802–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crook J, Moldofsky H. The probability of recovery and return to work from work disability as a function of time. Qual Life Res. 1994;3(Suppl 1):97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gjesdal S, Bratberg E, Maeland J. Gender differences in disability after sickness absence with musculoskeletal disorders: five-year prospective study of 37,942 women and 26,307 men. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12(1):37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coutu MF, Durand MJ, Loisel P, Goulet C, Gauthier N. Level of distress among workers undergoing work rehabilitation for musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17(2):289–303.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mäntyselkä PT, Kumpusalo EA, Ahonen RS, Takala JK. Direct and indirect costs of managing patients with musculoskeletal pain–challenge for health care. Eur J Pain. 2002;6(2):141–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hirsh A, Waxenberg L, Atchison J, Gremillion H, Robinson M. Evidence for sex differences in the relationships of pain, mood, and disability. J Pain. 2006;7(8):592–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gjesdal S, Bratberg E. The role of gender in long-term sickness absence and transition to permanent disability benefits. Results from a multiregister based, prospective study in Norway 1990–1995. Eur J Public Health. 2002;12(3):180–6.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Messing K, Stock S, Tissot F. Should studies of risk factors for MSDs be stratified by gender? Lessons from analyses of musculoskeletal disorders among respondents to the 1998 Québec health survey. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2009;35(2):96–112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harrold L, Savageau J, Pransky G, Benjamin K. Understanding the role of sex differences in work injuries: implications for primary care practice. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30(1):36–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Messing K, Mager Stellman J. Sex, gender and women’s occupational health: the importance of considering mechanism. Environ Res. 2006;101(2):149–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leijon M, Hensing G, Alexanderson K. Sickness absence due to musculoskeletal diagnoses: association with occupational gender segregation. Scand J Public Health. 2004;32(2):94–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feuerstein M, Berkowitz S, Peck C Jr. Musculoskeletal-related disability in US army personnel: prevalence, gender, and military occupational specialties. J Occup Environ Med. 1997;39(1):68–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    De Rijk A, Janssen N, Alexanderson K, Nijhuis F. Gender differences in return to work patterns among sickness absentees and their associations with health: a prospective cohort study in The Netherlands. Int J Rehabil Res. 2008;31(4):327–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alexanderson K, Borg K, Hensing G. Sickness absence with low-back, shoulder, or neck diagnoses: an 11-year follow-up regarding gender differences in sickness absence and disability pension. Work. 2005;25(2):115–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kaptein S, Gignac M, Badley E. Differences in the workforce experiences of women and men with arthritis disability: a population health perspective. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61(5):605–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ahlgren C, Hammarstrom A. Back to work? Gendered experiences of rehabilitation. Scand J Public Health. 2000;28(2):88–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    De Rijk A, Nijhuis F, Alexanderson K. Gender differences in work modifications and changed job characteristics during the return-to-work process: a prospective cohort study. J Occup Rehabil. 2009;19(2):185–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hooftman W, van der Beek A, Bongers P, van Mechelen W. Is there a gender difference in the effect of work-related physical and psychosocial risk factors on musculoskeletal symptoms and related sickness absence? Scand J Work Environ Health. 2009;35(2):85–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fillingim RB, King CD, Ribeiro-Dasilva MC, Rahim-Williams B, Riley JL III. Sex, gender, and pain: a review of recent clinical and experimental findings. J Pain. 2009;10(5):447–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bekker M. Investigating gender within health research is more than sex disaggregation of data: a multi-facet gender and health model. Psychol Health Med. 2003;8(2):231–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Punnett L, Herbert R. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders: is there a gender differential, and if so, what does it mean. Women Health. 2000;38(6):474–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Artazcoz L, Borrell C, Cortàs I, Escribà-Agüir V, Cascant L. Occupational epidemiology and work related inequalities in health: a gender perspective for two complementary approaches to work and health research. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007;61(Suppl 2):39–45.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hammarström A. A tool for developing gender research in medicine: examples from the medical literature on work life. Gend Med. 2007;4 suppl B:123–32.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rivard M, Lederer V, Rossignol M, Contandriopoulos AP, Sainte-Marie G. Les lombalgies et lésions musculo-squelettiques chroniques, un coût pour la santé: résultats d’une étude coûts-avantages d’une intervention de réadaptation au travail. Rev Rhum. 2011;78(Suppl 2):87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Loisel P, Durand P, Abenhaim L, Gosselin L, Simard R, Turcotte J, et al. Management of occupational back pain: the Sherbrooke model. Results of a pilot and feasibility study. J Occup Environ Med. 1994 Sep;51(9):597–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Loisel P, Abenhaim L, Durand P, Esdaile JM, Suissa S, Gosselin L, et al. A population-based, randomized clinical trial on back pain management. Spine. 1997;22(24):2911–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Steenstra IA, Anema JR, Bongers PM, De Vet HCW, Knol DL, Van Mechelen W. The effectiveness of graded activity for low back pain in occupational healthcare. J Occup Environ Med. 2006;63(11):718–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Krause N, Frank JW, Dasinger LK, Sullivan TJ, Sinclair SJ. Determinants of duration of disability and return-to-work after work-related injury and illness: challenges for future research. Am J Ind Med. 2001;40(4):464–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    de Vet H, Heymans M, Dunn K, Pope D, van der Beek A, Macfarlane G, et al. Episodes of low back pain: a proposal for uniform definitions to be used in research. Spine. 2002;27(21):2409–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fuller S. Investigating longitudinal dimensions of precarious employment: conceptual and practical issues. In: Vosko LF, MacDonald M, Campbell I, editors. Gender and the contours of precarious employment. New York: Routledge; 2009. p. 226–31.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Silverstein B, Fan Z, Smith C, Bao S, Howard N, Spielholz P, et al. Gender adjustment or stratification in discerning upper extremity musculoskeletal disorder risk? Scand J Work Environ Health. 2009;35(2):113–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Klein JP, Moeschberger ML. Survival analysis: techniques for censored and truncated data. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2003.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stata Statistical Software [computer program]. Version 11. College Station, TX: StataCorp; 2010.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Messing K, Punnett L, Bond M, Alexanderson K, Pyle J, Zahm S, et al. Be the fairest of them all: challenges and recommendations for the treatment of gender in occupational health research. Am J Ind Med. 2003;43(6):618–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Durand MJ, Loisel P, Hong QN, Charpentier N. Helping clinicians in work disability prevention: the work disability diagnosis interview. J Occup Rehabil. 2002;12(3):191–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valérie Lederer
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Michèle Rivard
    • 1
    • 2
  • Samia Djemaa Mechakra-Tahiri
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Social and Preventive MedicineUniversity of MontrealMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Public Health Research InstituteUniversity of MontrealMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations