Skip to main content

Factors contributing to job satisfaction following rehabilitation for musculoskeletal impairments

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation volume 3, pages 213–222 (1993)Cite this article

Abstract

The study investigates whether changing jobs is related to work-related well-being of people with musculoskeletal impairments. In order to assess this relationship subjects who began new jobs after rehabilitation (N=52) were compared with subjects who returned to their former employment (N=63). Work-related well-being was measured by means of the scales “job satisfaction” and “need to recover after work.” After controlling for individual characteristics (gender, age, working hours per week, and pain complaints) and job characteristics (job demands and decision latitude), job satisfaction could be predicted by job change. Recovery need after work was predicted by pain complaints, job demands, and decision latitude, but not by job change.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Hearne PG, Employment strategies for people with disabilities: A prescription for change.Milbank Q 1991; 69 (Suppl 1/2): 111–128.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Merens-Riedstra HR.Leven zonder werk (Living without work). Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.Enige aspecten van arbeid in de toekomst (Some aspects of work in the future). 's Gravenhage: Staatsuitgeverij, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Walker A, Townsend P.Disability in Britain: A manifesto of rights. Oxford: Martin Robertson,1981.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Verkley HGM,Langdurige wekkloosheid: Bevindingen van een 2-jarige follow-up (Long term unemployment: Results from a 2-years follow-up). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lahelma E. Unemployment and mental wellbeing: Elaboration of the relationship.Int J Health Serv 1992;22: 261–274.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bränholm IB, Eklund M, Fugl-Meyer KS, Fugl-Meyer AR. On work and life satisfaction.J Rehab Sci 1991;4: 29–34.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hörnquist JO, Zar M, Hansson B. Precursors of repeated short-term sick-leave: An empirical review of some background, job and wellbeing characteristics.Scan J Soc Med 1993; 21: 164–170.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Karasek R, Theorell T,Healthy work. Stress, productivity and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Furda J, Meijman T. Druk en dreiging: Sturing of stress. In Winnubst JAM, Schabracq MJ, ed.Handboek arbeid en gezondheid psychologie (Pressure and threat: Control or stress. Handbook of Psychology of Work and Health). Utrecht: Lemma, 1992, pp. 127–144.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yelin E, Meenan R, Nevitt M, Epstein W. Work disability in Rehumatoid Arthritis: Effects of disease, social and work factors.Ann Intern Med 1980; 93: 551–556.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fifield J, Reisine ST, Grady K. Work disability and the experience of pain and depression in rheumatoid arthritis.Soc Sci Med 1991; 33: 579–585.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Oel CJ van, Meijman TF, Berg BMC van den, Berg DMTh van den, Oort-Marburger D, Schmidt SH. The Impact of job characteristics on work-related wellbeing of handicapped employees, in relation to pain.Clin Rehab 1993 (submitted).

  14. Schmidt SH, Ekeren C van, Scholten L.Revalidatie en arbeid (Rehabilitation and work). Amsterdam: Institute of Social Medicine University of Amsterdam, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Oort-Marburger D, Schmidt SH, Berg BMC van den, Berg DMTh van den, Meijman TF.Non-responsie in een onderzoek naar effecten van arbeidsrevalidatie (Non-response in a study on the effects of vocational rehabilitation). Amsterdam: Research Institute of Work and Health/Institute of Social Medicine University of Amsterdam, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Pope AM, Tarlow AR, eds.Disability in America: Toward a national agenda for prevention. Washington DC: National Academy Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mokken RJ, Lewis C. A nonparametric approach to the analysis of dichotomous item responses.Appl Psych Meas 1982; 6: 417–430.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hogervorst PAM.Welbevinden in het werk en de relatie met werkdruk en autonomie (Work-related wellbeing in relation to job demands and decision latitude). Amsterdam: Facutly of Psychology University of Amsterdam, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Oel CJ van Berg BMC van den, Berg DMTh van den Meijman TF, Oort-Marburger D, Schmidt SHHet activiteiten en vaardigheden profiel (The Activities and Proficiencies Profile), Amsterdam: Research Institute of Work and Health/Institute of Social Medicine University of Amsterdam, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Meijman TF, Noord F van, Hellinga P, Gloerich F, Dormolen M van.Workload of driving examiners: A construction of scales. Groningen: Faculty of Psychology University of Groningen, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Warr PB, Decision latitude, job demands, and employee wellbeing.Work & Stress 1990; 4: 285–294.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Reisine ST, Grady KE, Goodenow C, Fifield J. Work disability among women with rheumatoid arthritis.Arthritis Rheum1989; 32: 538–543.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Festinger L. Cognitive dissonance. InReadings from Scientific American: Contemporary Psychology. San Francisco: WH Freeman and Company, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Groenestijn MAJ van. Artikel 30 Ziektewet een (on)bruikbaar instrument (Article 30 of the Sickness Insurance Law an (in)effective instrument).SMA 1991; 46: 374–381.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Harmsen-Alkema J, Noz M, Werken tijdens de ziektewetperiode bevorderen door samenwerking van verzekeringsgeneeskundige en behandelend arts (Promoting work for individuals receiving sickness benefit by the cooperation between the physician and the health insurance consultant).Ned Tijdschr Geneesk 1992; 136: 1920–1922.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.Psychol Rev 1977; 84: 191–215.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Social Medicine/Research Centre “Work and Health,” Faculty of Medicine, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 15, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Sonja H. Schmidt, Clarine J. van Oel & Dorothé Oort-Marburger

  2. Research Centre “Work and Health,” Faculty of Medicine, and Department of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Theo F. Meijman & Annemiek Scholten

Authors
  1. Sonja H. Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Theo F. Meijman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Annemiek Scholten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Clarine J. van Oel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Dorothé Oort-Marburger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schmidt, S.H., Meijman, T.F., Scholten, A. et al. Factors contributing to job satisfaction following rehabilitation for musculoskeletal impairments. J Occup Rehab 3, 213–222 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01097431

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01097431

Key Words

  • job satisfaction
  • rehabilitation
  • musculoskeletal impairments