Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Insights into the Sustainable Return to Work of Aging Workers with a Work Disability: An Interpretative Description Study

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

Abstract

Purpose A sustainable return to work (S-RTW) following prolonged work disability poses particular challenges as workers age. This article provides a synthesis of the factors and issues involved in a S-RTW process for aging workers following such a disability. Methods Using interpretive description methods, a critical review was conducted of the literature specifying return-to-work factors and issues for aging workers with regard to four major causes of work disability (musculoskeletal disorders, common mental disorders, cancer or other chronic diseases). The initial review concerned the 2000–2016 literature, and was subsequently updated for November 2016–December 2018. To further explore and contextualise the results of this literature review, four focus groups were held with stakeholders, representing the workplace, insurance, and healthcare systems and workers. Qualitative thematic analysis was performed. Results Fifty-five articles were reviewed and 35 stakeholders participated in the focus groups. Returning to work and staying at work appear to be particularly challenging for aging workers, who face notable issues and stigma concerning their ability to meet work demands, as well as their mobilisation and engagement in these processes. Such findings echo in many ways the main assertions of the literature on aging at work, except those regarding the transformation of capacities with aging, which is not mentioned in relation to workers with a work disability. The influence of healthcare and compensation systems on the S-RTW of aging work-disabled workers has also received little attention to date. Conclusions The results underscore that aging workers with a disability are frequently vulnerable in terms of their health or their jobs. Intersectoral efforts are needed to remedy this situation to keep them at work.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dewa CS, Chau N, Dermer S. Examining the comparative incidence and costs of physical and mental health-related disabilities in an employed population. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52:758–762.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Koopmans PC, Bültmann U, Roelen CAM, Hoedeman R, van der Klink JJL, Groothoff JW. Recurrence of sickness absence due to common mental disorders. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2011;84:193–201.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Demers G, Boudreau Y, Fernet M, Jeanniot L, Tremblay M, Godbout C, et al. Le vieillissement de la main-d’œuvre et l’avenir de la retraite : Des enjeux pour tous. Un effort de chacun. Rapport de la commission nationale sur la participation au marché du travail des travailleuses et travailleurs expérimentés de 55 ans et plus (The aging workforce and the future of retirement: stakes for all.Everyone's effort. Report from the national commission on labor market participation of experienced workers aged 55 and over). Québec, QC: Commission nationale sur la participation au marché du travail des travailleuses et travailleurs expérimentés de 55 ans et plus (National commission on labor market participation of experienced workers aged 55 and over); 2011.

  4. Corsi M, Lodovici MS, European Commission Expert group in gender equality, social inclusion, health and long-term care. Active ageing and gender equality policies: the employment and social inclusion of women and men of late working and early retirement age. Publications Office of the European Union; 2012.

  5. Stanford Center on Longevity - Financial Security Division, editor. Adapting to an aging workforce. Proceedings of the 2nd “Adapting to an Aging Workforce” conference; 2014 Jan 30–31; New York. Stanford: Stanford Center on Longevity; 2014.

  6. Kelly K. The aging workforce: four steps to maximize older workers in your organization. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Kenan-Flagler Business School; 2015.

  7. Hasselhorn HM, Wenke A. Understanding employment participation of older workers: creating a knowledge base for future labour market challenges. Berlin (DE): Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS) and Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 2015.

  8. Silverstein M. Meeting the challenges of an aging workforce. Am J Ind Med. 2008;51:269–280.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eurostat. Health and safety at work in Europe (1999–2007). A statistical portrait. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2010.

  10. Bureau of Labor Statistics. News Release. Nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses requiring days away from work [Internet]. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Labor; 2013 [cited 2018 Jul 16]. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/osh2_11262013.pdf

  11. Rogers E, Wiatrowksi WJ. Injuries, illnesses, and fatalities among older workers. Monthly Labor Rev. 2005;128:24–30.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wiatrowski WJ. Older workers less likely to have severe work injuries, but they miss more work days to recover. TED: The Economics Daily [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2018 Jul 19]. https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2013/ted_20131230.htm#bls-print

  13. Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail du Québec (Quebec Workers Compensation Board). Statistiques sur les lésions attribuables aux TMS en milieu de travail : 2010–2013 (Statistics on MSD injuries in the workplace: 2010–2013). Québec: Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail du Québec; 2014.

  14. Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail du Québec (Quebec Workers Compensation Board). Portrait des lésions professionnelles chez les travailleurs de 55 ans et plus : 2002–2011 (Portrait of occupational injuries among 55+ workers: 2002–2011). Québe: Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail du Québec; 2014.

  15. Jetha A, Besen E, Smith PM. Comparing the relationship between age and length of disability across common chronic conditions. J Occup Environ Med. 2016;58:485–491.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Roelen CAM, Norder G, Koopmans PC, van Rhenen W, van der Klink JJL, Bültmann U. Employees sick-listed with mental disorders: who returns to work and when? J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22:409–417.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Smith PM, Black O, Keegel T, Collie A. Are the predictors of work absence following a work-related injury similar for musculoskeletal and mental health claims? J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24:79–88.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Virtanen M, Vahtera J, Head J, Dray-Spira R, Okuloff A, Tabak AG, et al. Work disability among employees with diabetes: latent class analysis of risk factors in three prospective cohort studies. PLoS ONE. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143184.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Dalen HPV, Henkens K, Schippers J. Productivity of older workers: perceptions of employers and employees. Popul Dev Rev. 2010;36:309–330.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Faurie I, Fraccaroli F, Blanc AL. Âge et travail: des études sur le vieillissement au travail à une approche psychosociale de la fin de la carrière professionnelle (Age and work: from studies of aging at work to a psychosocial approach of the end of a professional career). Travail Humain (Human Work). 2008;71:137–172.

    Google Scholar 

  21. DeArmond S, Tye M, Chen PY, Krauss A, Rogers DA, Sintek E. Age and gender stereotypes: new challenges in a changing workplace and workforce. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2006;36:2184–2214.

    Google Scholar 

  22. McCann RM, Giles H. Communication with people of different ages in the workplace: Thai and American data. Hum Commun Res. 2006;32:74–108.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Brooke L, Taylor P. Older workers and employment: managing age relations. Ageing Soc. 2005;25:415–429.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Redman T, Snape E. Ageism in teaching: stereotypical beliefs and discriminatory attitudes towards the over-50s. Work Employ Soc. 2002;16:355–371.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Chiu W, Chan AW, Snape E, Redman T. Age stereotypes and discriminatory attitudes towards older workers: an east-west comparison. Hum Relat. 2001;54:629–661.

    Google Scholar 

  26. McGoldrick AE, Arrowsmith J. Discrimination by age: the organizational response. In: Glover I, Branine M, editors. Ageism in work and employment. London: Routledge; 2017. p. 93–114.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ng TWH, Feldman DC. The relationships of age with job attitudes: a meta-analysis. Pers Psychol. 2010;63:677–718.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Segrave K. Age discrimination by employers. Jefferson: McFarland; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Warr P, Fay D. Age and personal initiative at work. Eur J Work Org Psychol. 2001;10:343–353.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wilkening R. The age 60 rule: age discrimination in commercial aviation. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2002;73:194–202.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Waldman D, Avolio BJ. A meta-analysis of age differences in job performance. J Appl Psychol. 1986;71:33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Raposo S, Carstensen LL. Developing a research agenda to combat ageism. Generations. 2015;39:79–85.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jeske D, Roßnagel CS. Learning capability and performance in later working life: towards a contextual view. Educucation + Training. 2015;57:378–391.

    Google Scholar 

  34. McDaniel MA, Pesta BJ, Banks GC. Job performance and the aging worker. In: Hedge JW, Borman WC, editors. The Oxford handbook of work and aging. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 280–297.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Christian J, Turner R, Holt N, Larkin M, Cotler JH. Does intergenerational contact reduce ageism: when and how contact interventions actually work? J Arts Human. 2014;3:1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Harris K, Krygsman S, Waschenko J, Laliberte RD. Ageism and the older worker: a scoping review. Gerontologist. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw194.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Finkelstein LM. Older workers, stereotypes, and discrimination in the context of the employment relationship. In: Bal PM, Kooij D, Rousseau D, editors. Aging workers and the employee-employer relationship. Cham: Springer; 2015. p. 13–32.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Posthuma RA, Wagstaff MF, Campion MA. Age stereotypes and workplace age discrimination. In: Hedge JW, Borman WC, editors. The Oxford handbook of work and aging. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 298–309.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rizzuto TE, Cherry KE, LeDoux JA. The aging process and cognitive capabilities. In: Hedge JW, Borman WC, editors. The Oxford handbook of work and aging. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 236–252.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Vasconcelos AF. Older workers: some critical societal and organizational challenges. Journal of Management Development. 2015;34:352–372.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bal PM, Jansen PGW. Idiosyncratic deals for older workers: increased heterogeneity among older workers enhance the need for i-deals. In: Bal PM, Kooij D, Rousseau D, editors. Aging workers and the employee-employer relationship. Springer: Cham; 2015. p. 129–144.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Dannefer D. Cumulative advantage/disadvantage and the life course: cross-fertilizing age and social science theory. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2003;58:S327–S337.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kanfer R, Ackerman PL. Aging, adult development, and work motivation. Acad Manage Rev. 2004;29:440–458.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kooij DTAM, van de Voorde K. Strategic HRM for older workers. In: Bal PM, Kooij D, Rousseau D, editors. Aging workers and the employee-employer relationship. Springer: Cham; 2015. p. 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Truxillo D, Cadiz D, Hammer L. Supporting the aging workforce: a research review and recommendations for workplace intervention research. Ann Rev Org Psychol Org Behav. 2015;2:351–381.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Fisher GG, Chaffee DS, Tetrick LE, Davalos DB, Potter GG. Cognitive functioning, aging, and work: a review and recommendations for research and practice. J Occup Health Psychol. 2017;22:314–336.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Maertens JA, Putter SE, Chen PY, Diehl M, Huang Y-H. Physical capabilities and occupational health of older workers. In: Hedge JW, Borman WC, editors. The Oxford handbook of work and aging. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 215–2280.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hertel G, Thielgen M, Rauschenbach C, Grube A, Stamov-Roßnagel C, Krumm S. Age differences in motivation and stress at work. In: Schlick CM, Frieling E, Wegge J, editors. Age-differentiated work systems. Berlin: Springer; 2013. p. 119–147.

    Google Scholar 

  49. James JB, Swanberg JE, McKechnie SP. Responsive workplaces for older workers: job quality, flexibility and employee engagement. Chestnut Hill, MA: Sloan Center on Aging & Work at Boston College; 2007. 10 p. Issue Brief 11.

  50. Stamov-Roßnagel C, Hertel G. Older workers’ motivation: against the myth of general decline. Manag Decis. 2010;48:894–906.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Hunt MR. Strengths and challenges in the use of interpretive description: reflections arising from a study of the moral experience of health professionals in humanitarian work. Qual Health Res. 2009;19:1284–1292.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Thorne S, Kirkham SR, O’Flynn-Magee K. The analytic challenge in interpretive description. Int J Qual Methods. 2004;3:1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Gallagher F, Corbière M, Larivière N. La recherche descriptive interprétative: description des besoins psychosociaux de femmes à la suite d’un résultat anormal à la mammographie de dépistage du cancer du sein (Interpretative descriptive research: a description of the psychosocial needs of women resulting from an abnormal breast cancer screening mammography). Méthodes qualitatives, quantitatives et mixtes dans la recherche en sciences humaines, sociales et de la santé (Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods in human, social, and health sciences). Quebec: Presses de l'Université du Québec; 2014. pp. 5–28.

  54. Kahlke RM. Generic qualitative approaches: pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. Int J Qual Methods. 2014;13:37–52.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Thorne S. Interpretive description: qualitative research for applied practice. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J. 2009;26:91–108.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Thorne S, Kirkham SR, MacDonald-Emes J. Interpretive description: a noncategorical qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge. Res Nurs Health. 1997;20:169–177.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Carlsen B, Glenton C. What about N? A methodological study of sample-size reporting in focus group studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:26.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Nachemson A. Back pain: delimiting the problem in the next millennium. Int J Law Psychiatry. 1999;22:473–490.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Loisel P, Côté P. The work disability paradigm and its public health implications. In: Loisel P, Anema JR, editors. Handbook of work disability. New York: Springer; 2013. p. 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Loisel P, Durand M, Berthelette D, Vézina N, Baril R, Gagnon D, et al. Disability prevention: new paradigm for the management of occupational back pain. Dis Manag Health Outcomes. 2001;9:351–360.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Durand M-J, Nastasia I, Coutu M-F, Bernier M. Practices of return-to-work coordinators working in large organizations. J Occup Rehabil. 2017;27:137–147.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Loisel P, Buchbinder R, Hazard R, Keller R, Scheel I, van Tulder M, et al. Prevention of work disability due to musculoskeletal disorders: the challenge of implementing evidence. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15:507–524.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Loisel P. Work disability: it is not just the “lesion”. In: Feuerstein M, editor. Work and cancer survivors. New York: Springer; 2009. p. 93–103.

    Google Scholar 

  65. McCarthy J, Heraty N, Cross C, Cleveland JN. Who is considered an ‘older worker’’? Extending our conceptualisation of “older” from an organisational decision maker perspective. Hum Resource Manag J. 2014;24:374–393.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Ilmarinen JE. Aging workers. Occup Environ Med. 2001;58:546–546.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Soer R, Brouwer S, Geertzen JH, van der Schans CP, Groothoff JW, Reneman MF. Decline of functional capacity in healthy aging workers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:2326–332.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Liehr PR, Taft Marcus M, Cameron C. Qualitative approaches to research. In: LoBiondo-Wood G, Haber J, Cameron C, Singh M, editors. Nursing research in Canada. Methods, critical appraisal, and utilization. Toronto: Elsevier; 2018. p. 54–62.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldana J. Qualitative data analysis. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Neergaard MA, Olesen F, Andersen RS, Sondergaard J. Qualitative description: the poor cousin of health research? BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9:52.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Saint-Arnaud L, Saint-Jean M. Le vieillissement des travailleurs et le processus de réinsertion professionnelle (Workers' aging and the professional reintegration process). Gérontologie et Société (Gerontology and Society). 2002;25(102):127–135.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Ruseckaite R, Collie A, Scheepers M, Brijnath B, Kosny A, Mazza D. Factors associated with sickness certification of injured workers by general practitioners in Victoria Australia. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:298.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Balducci L, Fossa SD. Rehabilitation of older cancer patients. Acta Oncol. 2013;52:233–238.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Delloiacono N. Musculoskeletal safety for older adults in the workplace: review of current best practice evidence. Workplace Health Saf. 2015;63:48–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Palmer KT, Goodson N. Ageing, musculoskeletal health and work. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2015;29:391–404.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Boot CRL, de Kruif ATCM, Shaw WS, van der Beek AJ, Deeg DJ, Abma T. Factors important for work participation among older workers with depression, cardiovascular disease, and osteoarthritis: a mixed method study. J Occup Rehabil. 2016;26:160–172.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Lammerts L, Schaafsma FG, Eikelenboom M, Vermeulen SJ, van Mechelen W, Anema JR, et al. Longitudinal associations between biopsychosocial factors and sustainable return to work of sick-listed workers with a depressive or anxiety disorder. J Occup Rehabil. 2016;26:70–79.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Roessler RT, Rumrill PD Jr, Li J, Leslie MJ. Predictors of differential employment statuses of adults with multiple sclerosis. J Vocat Rehabil. 2015;42:141–152.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Jetha A, Bowring J, Tucker S, Connelly CE, Martin Ginis KA, Proulx L, et al. Transitions that matter: life course differences in the employment of adults with arthritis. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40:3127–135.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Sanders MJ. Older manufacturing workers and adaptation to age-related changes. Am J Occup Ther. 2018;72:1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Ervasti J, Mattila-Holappa P, Joensuu M, Pentti J, Virtanen M, Lallukka T, et al. Predictors of depression and musculoskeletal disorder related work disability among young, middle-aged, and aging employees. J Occup Environ Med. 2017;59:114–119.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Mattila-Holappa P, Ervasti J, Joensuu M, Ahola K, Pentti J, Oksanen T, et al. Do predictors of return to work and recurrence of work disability due to mental disorders vary by age? A cohort study. Scand J Public Health. 2017;45:178–184.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Ullrich A, Rath H, Otto U, Kerschgens C, Raida M, Hagen-Aukamp C, et al. Outcomes across the return-to-work process in PC survivors attending a rehabilitation measure-results from a prospective study. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25:3007–3155.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Jason KJ, Carr DC, Washington TR, Hilliard TS, Mingo CA. Multiple chronic conditions, resilience, and workforce transitions in later life: a socio-ecological model. Gerontologist. 2017;57:269–281.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Gignac MAM, Kristman V, Smith PM, Beaton DE, Badley EM, Ibrahim S, et al. Are there differences in workplace accommodation needs, use and unmet needs among older workers with arthritis, diabetes and no chronic conditions? Examining the role of health and work context. Work Aging Retire. 2018;4:381–398.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Koolhaas W, van der Klink JJL, Vervoort JPM, de Boer MR, Brouwer S, Groothoff JW. In-depth study of the workers’ perspectives to enhance sustainable working life: comparison between workers with and without a chronic health condition. J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23:170–179.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Leijten FRM, van den Heuvel SG, van der Beek AJ, Ybema JF, Robroek SJW, Burdorf A. Associations of work-related factors and work engagement with mental and physical health: a 1-year follow-up study among older workers. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25:86–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Smith P, Bielecky A, Ibrahim S, Mustard C, Saunders R, Beaton D, et al. Impact of pre-existing chronic conditions on age differences in sickness absence after a musculoskeletal work injury: a path analysis approach. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2014;40:167–175.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Saunders C, Brown JJ, Carter DJ, Lapkin S. Chronic disease management support in Australian workplaces-low base, rising need. Health Promot J Austr. 2018;29:257–264.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Kadijk EA, van den Heuvel S, Ybema JF, Leijten FRM. The influence of multi-morbidity on the work ability of ageing employees and the role of coping style. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29:503–513.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Cichy KE, Leslie M, Rumrill PD, Koch LC. Population aging and disability: implications for vocational rehabilitation practice. J Vocat Rehabil. 2017;47:185–196.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Welch L, Haile E, Boden LI, Hunting KL. Musculoskeletal disorders among construction roofers–physical function and disability. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2009;35:56–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Boot CRL, Deeg DJH, Abma T, Rijs KJ, Pas S, Tilburg TG, et al. Predictors of having paid work in older workers with and without chronic disease: a 3-year prospective cohort study. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;3:563–572.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Leijten FR, van den Heuvel SG, Ybema JF, Robroek SJW, Burdorf A. Do work factors modify the association between chronic health problems and sickness absence among older employees? Scand J Work Environ Health. 2013;39:477–485.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. de Wind A, Scharn M, Geuskens GA, van der Beek AJ, Boot CRL, Boot CRL. Predictors of working beyond retirement in older workers with and without a chronic disease: results from data linkage of Dutch questionnaire and registry data. BMC Public Health. 2018;18:1.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Leijten FRM, de Wind A, van den Heuvel SG, Ybema JF, van der Beek AJ, Robroek SJW, et al. The influence of chronic health problems and work-related factors on loss of paid employment among older workers. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2015;69:1058–1065.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Sewdas R, Van Der Beek AJ, De Wind A, Van Der Zwaan LGL, Boot CRL. Determinants of working until retirement compared to a transition to early retirement among older workers with and without chronic diseases: results from a Dutch prospective cohort study. Scand J Public Health. 2018;46:400–408.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Erickson AS. A survey of supports used by women with arthritis over age 50 to maintain employment. Lexington: University of Kentucky; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Smith P, Chen C, Mustard C, Hogg-Johnson S, Tompa E. The relationship between worker, occupational and workplace characteristics and whether an injury requires time off work: a matched case-control analysis in Ontario, Canada. Am J Ind Med. 2015;58:402–410.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Yelin E, Sonneborn D, Trupin L. The prevalence and impact of accommodations on the employment of persons 51–61 years of age with musculoskeletal conditions. Arthritis Care Res. 2000;13:168–176.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Arvilommi P, Suominen K, Mantere O, Valtonen H, Leppämäki S, Isometsä E. Predictors of long-term work disability among patients with type I and II bipolar disorder: a prospective 18-month follow-up study. Bipolar Disord. 2015;17:821–835.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. van de Vijfeijke H, Leijten FRM, Ybema JF, van den Heuvel SG, Robroek SJW, van der Beek AJ, et al. Differential effects of mental and physical health and coping style on work ability: a 1-year follow-up study among aging workers. J Occup Environ Med. 2013;55:1238–1243.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Olesen SC, Butterworth P, Rodgers B. Is poor mental health a risk factor for retirement? Findings from a longitudinal population survey. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2012;47:735–744.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. La EB. vulnérabilité en question? (Vulnerability in question?). Ethics Med Public Health. 2017;3:365–373.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Durand M-J, Vézina N, Baril R, Loisel P, Richard M-C, Ngomo S. Relationship between the margin of manoeuvre and the return to work after a long-term absence due to a musculoskeletal disorder: an exploratory study. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33:1245–1252.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Appannah A, Biggs S. Age-friendly organisations: the role of organisational culture and the participation of older workers. J Soc Work Pract. 2015;29:37–51.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Costa-Black KM, Feuerstein M, Loisel P. Work disability models: past and present. In: Loisel P, Anema JR, editors. Handbook of work disability. New York: Springer; 2013. p. 71–93.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Lederer V, Loisel P, Rivard M, Champagne F. Exploring the diversity of conceptualizations of work (dis) ability: a scoping review of published definitions. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24:242–267.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Marcus J, Fritzsche BA. One size doesn’t fit all: toward a theory on the intersectional salience of ageism at work. Org Psychol Rev. 2015;5:168–188.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

Funding

This study was jointly funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) under the Healthy and Productive Work initiative (Grant No. 890–2016-3028).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre d’action en prévention et réadaptation des incapacités au travail (CAPRIT), Université de Sherbrooke, 150 Place Charles-Le Moyne, Suite 200, Longueuil, QC, J4K 0A8, Canada

    Marie-José Durand, Marie-France Coutu, Chantal Sylvain & Marie-Andrée Paquette

  2. Centre de recherche Charles-Le Moyne-Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean sur les innovations en santé (CR-CSIS), Université de Sherbrooke, 150 Place Charles-Le Moyne, Suite 200, Longueuil, QC, J4K 0A8, Canada

    Marie-José Durand, Marie-France Coutu, Dominique Tremblay, Chantal Sylvain & Marie-Andrée Paquette

  3. School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, 150 Place Charles-Le Moyne, Suite 200, Longueuil, QC, J4K 0A8, Canada

    Marie-José Durand, Marie-France Coutu & Chantal Sylvain

  4. School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, 150 Place Charles-Le Moyne, Longueuil, QC, J4K 0A8, Canada

    Dominique Tremblay

  5. Department of Management and Human Resource Management, School of Management, Université de Sherbrooke, 2500 Boulevard de l’Université, Sherbrooke, QC, J1K 2R1, Canada

    Marie-Michelle Gouin

  6. Faculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal, Station Centre-ville, PO Box 6128, Montreal, QC, H3C 3J7, Canada

    Karine Bilodeau

  7. Department of Industrial Relations, Université Laval, 1025 avenue des Sciences-Humaines, Québec, QC, G1V 0A6, Canada

    Laurie Kirouac

  8. Institut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST), 505 Boulevard De Maisonneuve West, Montreal, QC, H3A 3C2, Canada

    Iuliana Nastasia & Daniel Coté

Authors
  1. Marie-José Durand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marie-France Coutu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dominique Tremblay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chantal Sylvain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marie-Michelle Gouin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Karine Bilodeau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Laurie Kirouac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Marie-Andrée Paquette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Iuliana Nastasia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Daniel Coté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie-José Durand.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to declare.

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.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 22 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Durand, MJ., Coutu, MF., Tremblay, D. et al. Insights into the Sustainable Return to Work of Aging Workers with a Work Disability: An Interpretative Description Study. J Occup Rehabil 31, 92–106 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-020-09894-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-020-09894-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation