Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 173–188 | Cite as

Injured Workers’ Perspectives on How Workplace Accommodations are Conceptualized and Delivered Following Electrical Injuries

  • Mary Stergiou-Kita
  • Elizabeth Mansfield
  • Angela Colantonio
Article

Abstract

Purpose Returning to work following an electrical injury can be challenging due to the confluence of physical, cognitive and emotional impairments. Workplace accommodations can facilitate return to work. However, while electrical injuries can have potentially devastating consequences, there is a dearth of understanding of how workplace accommodations are obtained following electrical injury. This paper explores workers’ experiences of returning to work and accommodations following an occupation electrical injury. Methods Thirteen semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews were conducted with injured workers recruited from acute and rehabilitation burns programs in Ontario, Canada. Thematic analysis was employed to identify themes related to the request and provision of accommodations. Findings Findings reveal that accommodations are most frequently narrowly defined in relation to physical work restrictions, leading to the exclusion of cognitive and psychosocial concerns. Challenges within the accommodations process such as perceived legitimacy, a do-it-yourself approach to accommodations, and concerns regarding job security can also influence workers’ decisions to request accommodations. Process elements that facilitate the effective provision of workplace accommodations include: (1) finding a “just right” fit between workers’ abilities and assigned tasks and duties (2) establishing effective lines of communication between relevant stakeholders; (3) prompt response to needs; (4) having a knowledgeable individual in a position of power to advocate on workers’ behalf. Conclusions Further education regarding electrical injuries and workplace accommodations is warranted to increase workers’, employers’, health and insurance personnels’ knowledge about electrical injury and best practices for providing workplace accommodations.

Keywords

Rehabilitation  Vocational Electrical injuries Return to work Workplace accommodations Employment  Qualitative research 

References

  1. 1.
    ESFI white paper on occupational electrical accidents in the U.S. 2003–2009. [homepage on the internet]. http://www.esfi.org/index.cfm/page/ESFI-White-Paper-on-Occupational-Electrical-Accidents-in-the-U.S-2003--2009-Now-Available/cdid/11514/pid/10262.
  2. 2.
    Electrical safety authority safety report, 11th Edition. 2009. [homepage on the internet]. http://www.esasafe.com/pdf/Safety_Reports/2011/ESA-OESR-2011-All-FA-singles.pdf.
  3. 3.
    Theman K, Singerman J, Gomez M, Fish J. Return to work after low voltage electrical injury. J Burn Care Res. 2008;29(6):959–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jafari H, Couratier P, Camu W. Motor neuron disease after electric injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2011;71:265–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hiehlbronner R, Pliskin N. Psychological issues in the neurorehabilitation of electrical injuries. NeuroRehabilitation. 1999;13(2):127–32.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Primeau M. Neurorehabilitation of behavioural disorders following lightning and electrical trauma. Neuro Rehabil. 2005;20:24–33.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pliskin N, Ammar A, Fink J, Hill K, Malina A, Ramati A, Kelly K, Lee R. Neuropsychological changes following electrical injury. J Int Neuropsych Soc. 2006;12:17–23.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pliskin N, Fink J, Malina A, Moran S, Kelley K, Capelli-Schellpfeffer M, Lee R. The neuropsychological effects of electrical injury: New insights. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1999;888:140–9.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ramati A, Rubin L, Wicklund A, Pliskin N, Ammar A, Fink J, et al. Psychiatric morbidity following electrical injury and its effects on cognitive functioning. Gen Hosp Psychiatr. 2009;31:360–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Capelli-Schellpfeffer M. Roadblocks to return to work after electrical trauma. Neuro Rehabil. 2005;20(1):49–52.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yarnell P. Neurorehabilitation of cerebral disorders following lighting and electrical burns. Neuro Rehabil. 2005;20:15–8.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bryan B, Andrews C, Hurley R, Taber K. Electrical injury, part II: consequences. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2009;21(4):357–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Arnaldo B, Klein M, Gibran N. Practice guidelines for the management of electrical injuries. J Burn Care Res. 2009;27(4):439–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Coubrough V, Warnell P. The neurological complications of electrical injury: a nursing case management perspective. Axone. 2002;23(4):14–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Noble J, Gomez M, Fish J. Quality of life and return to work following electrical burns. Burns. 2006;23:159–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Calsafern K, Treherne, J, van der Leer G. BC’s mental health reform: best practices in psychosocial rehabilitation and recovery 2002. [homepage on the internet]. http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/mhd/best.html.
  17. 17.
    Shreuer N. Accommodation outcomes and the ICF framework. Assist Technol. 2009;21:94–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robinson C. Using engineering and assistive technologies for rehabilitation after electrical trauma. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1999;30(888):317–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stoddard S. Personal assistance services as a workplace accommodation. Work. 2006;27:362–9.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schartz H, Hendricks D, Blanck P. Workplace accommodations. Work. 2006;27:345–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom 1982. [homepage on the internet]. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html.
  22. 22.
    Employment Equity Act, last amended 2012. [homepage on the internet]. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-5.401/.
  23. 23.
    Canadian Human Rights Act, last amended 2012. [homepage on the internet]. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/.
  24. 24.
    Ontario Human Rights Code, last amended 2012. [homepage on the internet]. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90h19_e.htm.
  25. 25.
    Accessibility for Ontarians Disability Act 2005 [homepage on the internet]. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2011/elaws_src_regs_r11191_e.htm.
  26. 26.
    Williams M, Sabata D, Zolna J. User needs evaluation of workplace accommodations. Work. 2006;27:355–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Franche RL, Severin C, Hogg-Johnson S, Lee H, Cote P, Krause N. A multivariate analysis of factors associated with early offer and acceptance of a work accommodation following an occupational musculoskeletal injury. JOEM. 2009;51(8):969–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Varakamp I, van Dijk F. Workplace problems and solutions for employees with chronic diseases. Occup Med. 2010;60:287–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang J, Patten S, Currie S, Sareen J, Schmitz N. Perceived needs for and use of workplace accommodations by individuals with a depressive and/or anxiety disorder. JOEM. 2011;53(11):1268–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McDonald-Wilson K, Rogers E, Massaro J, Lyass A, Crean T. An investigation of reasonable workplace accommodations for people with psychiatric disabilities: quantitative findings from a multi-site study. Community Ment Health J. 2002;38(1):35–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yoko Ikezawa Y, Battie M, Beach J, Gross D. Do clinicians working within the same context make consistent return to work recommendations? J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20:367–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Beardwood B, Kirsh B, Clark N. Victims twice over: perceptions and experiences of injured workers. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(1):30–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kirsh B, Slack T, King C. The nature and impact of stigma towards injured workers. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(2):143–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lippel J. Workers describe the effect of the workers’ compensation process on their health: a Quebec study. Int J Law Psychiatr. 2007;30(4):427–43.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    MacEachen E, Agnieszka K, Ferrier S, Chambers L. “The “toxic dose” of system problems: why some injured workers don’t return to work as expected. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(3):349–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eakin J, Tarrasuk V. The problem of legitimacy in the experience of work-related back injury. Qual Health Res. 1995;5(2):204–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stuart H. Employment equity and mental disability. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2007;20:486–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Moll S, Eakin J, Franche R-L, Strike C. When health care workers experience mental Ill health institutional practices of silence. Qual Health Res. 2013;23(2):167–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jones A. Disclosure of mental illness in the workplace: a literature review. Am J Psychiatr Rehabil. 2011;14(3):212–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sanford J, Milchus K. Evidence-based practice in workplace accommodations. Work. 2006;27:329–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Shaw W, Feurestein M. Generating workplace accommodations: lesion learned from the integrated case management study. J Occup Rehabil. 2004;14(3):207–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Harnett H, Thurman H, Cordingly K. Individuals` perceptions of employment accommodation decisions and solutions: lessons for social workers. J Soc Work Disabil Rehabil. 2010;9:53–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Baril R, Clarke J, Friesen M, Stock S, Cole D, Bombardier C, et al. Management of return-to-work programs for workers with musculoskeletal disorders: a qualitative study in three Canadian provinces. Soc Sci Med. 2003;57(11):2101–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tarasuk V, Eakin JM. The problem of legitimacy in the experience of work-related back injury. Qual Health Res. 1995;5:204–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Stergiou-Kita M, Rappolt S, Kirsh B, Shaw L. Evaluating work readiness following acquired brain injury: building a shared understanding. Can J Occup Ther. 2009;76(4):276–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kirsh B, Stergiou-Kita M, Gewurtz R, Dawson D, Krupa T, Lysaght R, Shaw L. From margins to mainstream: what do we know about work integration for persons with brain injury, mental illness and intellectual disability. Work. 2008;32:391–405.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Friesen M, Yassi A, Cooper J. Return-to-work: the importance of human interactions and organizational structures. Work. 2001;17(1):11–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Leyshon R, Shaw L. Using multiple stakeholders to define a successful return to work: a concept mapping approach. Work. 2012;41(4):397–408.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pransky GS, Shaw WS, Franche RL, Clarke A. Disability prevention and communication among workers, physicians, employers, and insurers-current models and opportunities for improvement. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26(11):625–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Young, Amanda E. Return to work stakeholders’ perspectives on work disability. In: Handbook of work disability. New York: Springer; 2013. pp. 409–423.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lund T, Labriola M, Christensen K, Bultmann U, Villadsen E. Return to work among sickness-absent Danish employees: prospective results from the Danish Work Environment Cohort Study/National Register on Social Transfer Payments. Int J Rehabil Res. 2006;29(3):229–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Steenstra I, Verbeek J, Heymans M, Bongers P. Prognostic factors for duration of sick leave in patients sick listed with acute low back pain: a systematic review of the literature. Occup Environ Med. 2005;62:851–60.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Amick B, Habeck R, Hunt A, Fossel A, Chapin A, Keller R, Katz J. Measuring the impact of organizational behaviours on work disability prevention and management. J Occup Rehabil. 2000;10(1):21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Clougerty J, Souza K, Cullen M. Work and its role in shaping the social gradient in health. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2010;1186(1):102–24 February 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Huang Y-H, Pransky G, Shaw W, Benjamin K, Savageau J. Factors affecting organizational responses of employers to workers with injuries. Work. 2006;26:75–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary Stergiou-Kita
    • 1
    • 2
  • Elizabeth Mansfield
    • 1
  • Angela Colantonio
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Toronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health NetworkTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of Occupational Science and Occupational TherapyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations