Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Primary Care Physicians’ Learning Needs in Returning Ill or Injured Workers to Work. A Scoping Review

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

Abstract

Primary care physicians are uniquely positioned to assist ill and injured workers to stay-at-work or to return-to-work. Purpose The purpose of this scoping review is to identify primary care physicians’ learning needs in returning ill or injured workers to work and to identify gaps to guide future research. Methods We used established methodologies developed by Arksey and O’Malley, Cochrane and adapted by the Systematic Review Program at the Institute for Work & Health. We used Distiller SR©, an online systematic review software to screen for relevance and perform data extraction. We followed the PRISMA for Scoping Reviews checklist for reporting. Results We screened 2106 titles and abstracts, 375 full-text papers for relevance and included 44 studies for qualitative synthesis. The first learning need was related to administrative tasks. These included (1) appropriate record-keeping, (2) time management to review occupational information, (3) communication skills to provide clear, sufficient and relevant factual information, (4) coordination of services between different stakeholders, and (5) collaboration within teams and between different professions. The second learning need was related to attitudes and beliefs and included intrinsic biases, self-confidence, role clarity and culture of blaming the patient. The third learning need was related to specific knowledge and included work capacity assessments and needs for sick leave, environmental exposures, disclosure of information, prognosis of certain conditions and care to certain groups such as adolescents and pregnant workers. The fourth learning need was related to awareness of services and tools. Conclusions There are many opportunities to improve medical education for physicians in training or in continuing medical education to improve care for workers with an illness or injury that affect their 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. Carey TS, Hadler NM. The role of the primary physician in disability determination for social security insurance and workers’ compensation. Ann Intern Med. 1986;104(5):706–710.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kosny A, MacEachen E, Ferrier S, et al. The role of health care providers in long term and complicated workers’ compensation claims. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(4):582–590.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wanberg CR. The individual experience of unemployment. Annu Rev Psychol. 2012;63:369–396.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hildebrandt J, Pfingsten M, Saur P, et al. Prediction of success from a multidisciplinary treatment program for chronic low back pain. Spine. 1997;22(9):990–1001.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Scheel IB, Hagen KB, Oxman AD. Active sick leave for patients with back pain: all the players onside, but still no action. Spine. 2002;27(6):654–659.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Canadian Medical Association. The treating phyisicians role in helping patients return to work after an illness or injury 2013. https://policybase.cma.ca/documents/policypdf/PD13-05.pdf Accessed 15 Mar 2022.

  7. Academy of Medical Royal Colleges. 2019 Healthcare professionals’ Consensus Statement for Action Statement for Health and Work 2019. https://www.aomrc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Health-Work_Consensus_Statement_090419.pdf Accessed 1 Oct 2020.

  8. Talmage JB, Mehorn J, Hyman M (2011) Why staying at work or returning to work is in the patient’s best interest. In: Talmage JB, Mehorn J, Hyman M, editors. AMA guides to the evaluation of work ability and return to work. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL

  9. Papagoras H, Pizzari T, Coburn P, et al. Supporting return to work through appropriate certification: a systematic approach for Australian primary care. Aust Health Rev. 2018;42(2):164–167.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Alvino EC, Ahmad TM. How to determine whether our patients can function in the workplace: a missed opportunity in medical training programs. Permanente Journal. 2019;23:18–259.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Kosny A, Lifshen M, MacEachen E, et al. What are physicians told about their role in return to work and workers’ compensation systems? An analysis of Canadian resources. Policy and Practice in Health and Safety. 2019;17(1):78–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. The Association of Worker’s Compensation Boards of Canada. National work injury, disease and fatality statistics Mississauga, ON, Canada: The Association of Worker’s Compensation Boards of Canada; 2015. https://awcbc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2012-2014-NWISP-Publication-for-2015.pdf Accessed 15 Mar 2022.

  13. International Labour Organization. The prevention of occupational diseases Switzerland: International Labour Organization; 2013. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---safework/documents/publication/wcms_208226.pdf Accessed 1 Oct 2020.

  14. Nelson DI, Nelson RY, Concha-Barrientos M, et al. The global burden of occupational noise-induced hearing loss. Am J Ind Med. 2005;48(6):446–458.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Punnett L, Prüss-Ütün A, Nelson DI, et al. Estimating the global burden of low back pain attributable to combined occupational exposures. Am J Ind Med. 2005;48(6):459–469.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Trupin L, Earnest G, San Pedro M, et al. The occupational burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Eur Respir J. 2003;22(3):462–469.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Morabia A, Markowitz S, Garibaldi K, et al. Lung cancer and occupation: results of a multicentre case-control study. Br J Ind Med. 1992;49(10):721–727.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Blanc PD, Toren K. How much adult asthma can be attributed to occupational factors? Am J Med. 1999;107(6):580–587.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Beach J, Cherry N. Course participation and the recognition and reporting of occupational ill-health. Occup Med. 2019;69(7):487–493.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cochrane Training. Scoping reviews: what they are and how you can do them: Cochrane; 2017. https://training.cochrane.org/resource/scoping-reviews-what-they-are-and-how-you-can-do-them Accessed 1 Oct 2020.

  22. Irvin E, Van Eerd D, Amick BC 3rd, et al. Introduction to special section: systematic reviews for prevention and management of musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(2):123–126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA Extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–473.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kosny A, Lifshen M, Tonima S, et al. (2016) The role of health-care providers in the workers' compensation system and return-to-work process: final report. Toronto: Institute for Work & Health

  25. Atkins S, Reho T, Talola N, et al. Improved recording of work relatedness during patient consultations in occupational primary health care: a cluster randomized controlled trial using routine data. Trials. 2020;21(1):256.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Simmons JM, Liebman AK, Sokas RK. Occupational health in community health centers: practitioner challenges and recommendations. New Solut. 2018;28(1):110–130.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Aarseth G, Natvig B, Engebretsen E, et al. “Working is out of the question”: a qualitative text analysis of medical certificates of disability. BMC Fam Pract. 2017;18(1):55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Gray SE, Brijnath B, Mazza D, et al. Australian general practitioners’ and compensable patients: factors affecting claim management and return to work. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29(4):672–678.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Balasooriya-Smeekens C, Bateman A, Mant J, et al. How primary care can help survivors of transient ischaemic attack and stroke return to work: focus groups with stakeholders from a UK community. Br J Gen Pract. 2020;70(693):e294–e302.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Christie N, Beckett K, Earthy S, et al. Seeking support after hospitalisation for injury: a nested qualitative study of the role of primary care. Br J Gen Pract. 2016;66(642):e24–e31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sylvain C, Durand MJ, Maillette P, et al. How do general practitioners contribute to preventing long-term work disability of their patients suffering from depressive disorders? A qualitative study BMC Fam Pract. 2016;17:71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Vanmeerbeek M, Govers P, Schippers N, et al. Searching for consensus among physicians involved in the management of sick-listed workers in the Belgian health care sector: a qualitative study among practitioners and stakeholders. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):164.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Yagil D, Eshed-Lavi N, Carel R, et al. Return to work of cancer survivors: predicting healthcare professionals’ assumed role responsibility. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29(2):443–450.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Anastas TM, Miller MM, Hollingshead NA, et al. The unique and interactive effects of patient race, patient socioeconomic status, and provider attitudes on chronic pain care decisions. Ann Behav Med. 2020;54(10):771–782.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Dorrington S, Carr E, Stevelink SAM, et al. Demographic variation in fit note receipt and long-term conditions in south London. Occup Environ Med. 2020;77(6):418–426.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Riiser S, Haukenes I, Baste V, et al. Variation in general practitioners’ depression care following certification of sickness absence: a registry-based cohort study. Fam Pract. 2021;38(3):238–245.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Brijnath B, Mazza D, Kosny A, et al. Is clinician refusal to treat an emerging problem in injury compensation systems? BMJ Open. 2016;6(1): e009423.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Mandal R, Dyrstad K. Explaining variations in general practitioners’ experiences of doing medically based assessments of work ability in disability benefit claims a survey-based analysis. Cogent Medicine. 2017;4(1):1368614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hinkka K, Niemela M, Autti-Ramo I, et al. Physicians’ experiences with sickness absence certification in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 2019;47(8):859–866.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Yanar B, Kosny A, Lifshen M. Perceived role and expectations of health care providers in return to work. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29(1):212–221.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Lippel K, Eakin JM, Holness DL, et al. The structure and process of workers’ compensation systems and the role of doctors: a comparison of Ontario and Quebec. Am J Ind Med. 2016;59(12):1070–1086.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Moßhammer D, Michaelis M, Mehne J, et al. General practitioners’ and occupational health physicians’ views on their cooperation: a cross-sectional postal survey. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2016;89(3):449–459.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Stratil J, Rieger MA, Voelter-Mahlknecht S. Optimizing cooperation between general practitioners, occupational health and rehabilitation physicians in Germany: a qualitative study. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2017;90(8):809–821.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Sanders T, Wynne-Jones G, Nio Ong B, et al. Acceptability of a vocational advice service for patients consulting in primary care with musculoskeletal pain: a qualitative exploration of the experiences of general practitioners, vocational advisers and patients. Scandinavian J Public Health. 2019;47(1):78–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Lundberg T, Melander S. Key push and pull factors affecting return to work identified by patients with long-term pain and general practitioners in sweden. Qual Health Res. 2019;29(11):1581–1594.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bertilsson M, Maeland S, Love J, et al. The capacity to work puzzle: a qualitative study of physicians’ assessments for patients with common mental disorders. BMC Fam Pract. 2018;19(1):1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. de Kock CA, Lucassen PLBJ, Spinnewijn L, et al. How do Dutch GPs address work-related problems? A focus group study. European Journal of General Practice. 2016;22(3):169–175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. de Kock CA, Lucassen P, Bor H, et al. Training GPs to improve their management of work-related problems: results of a cluster randomized controlled trial. European Journal of General Practice. 2018;24(1):258–265.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. King R, Murphy R, Wyse A, et al. Irish GP attitudes towards sickness certification and the “fit note.” Occup Med. 2016;66(2):150–155.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Godycki-Cwirko M, Nocun M, Butler CC, et al. Family practitioners’ advice about taking time off work for lower respiratory tract infections: a prospective study in twelve European primary care networks. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(10): e0164779.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Nordhagen HP, Harvey SB, Rosvold EO, et al. Case-specific colleague guidance for general practitioners’ management of sickness absence. Occup Med. 2017;67(8):644–647.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Ruseckaite R, Collie A, Scheepers M, et al. Factors associated with sickness certification of injured workers by General Practitioners in Victoria. Australia BMC Public Health. 2016;16:298.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Sekoni KI, Jamil H. Completing disability forms efficiently and accurately: curriculum for residents. Primer. 2018;2:9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Marell L, Lindgren M, Nyhlin KT, et al. “Struggle to obtain redress”: women’s experiences of living with symptoms attributed to dental restorative materials and/or electromagnetic fields. Int J Qual Stud Health Well Being. 2016;11:32820.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Scharf J, Angerer P, Muting G, et al. Return to work after common mental disorders: a qualitative study exploring the expectations of the involved stakeholders. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(18):6635.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Coole C, Nouri F, Narayanasamy M, et al. Total hip and knee replacement and return to work: clinicians’ perspectives. Disabil Rehabil. 2021;43(9):1247–1254.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Peters SE, Coppieters MW, Ross M, et al. Health-care providers’ perspectives on factors influencing return-to-work after surgery for nontraumatic conditions of the upper extremity. J Hand Ther. 2020;33(1):87–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Dwyer CP, MacNeela P, Durand H, et al. Judgment analysis of case severity and future risk of disability regarding chronic low back pain by general practitioners in Ireland. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(3): e0194387.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Dwyer CP, MacNeela P, Durand H, et al. Effects of biopsychosocial education on the clinical judgments of medical students and GP trainees regarding future risk of disability in chronic lower back pain: a randomized control trial. Pain Med. 2020;21(5):939–950.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Mann A, Tator CH, Carson JD. Concussion diagnosis and management: knowledge and attitudes of family medicine residents. Can Fam Physician. 2017;63(6):460–466.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Schouten B, Bergs J, Vankrunkelsven P, et al. Healthcare professionals’ perspectives on the prevalence, barriers and management of psychosocial issues in cancer care: a mixed methods study. Eur J Cancer Care. 2019;28(1): e12936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Stergiou-Kita M, Pritlove C, Kirsh B. The, “Big C”: stigma, cancer, and workplace discrimination. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(6):1035–1050.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Graves JM, Klein TA. Nurse practitioners’ comfort in treating work-related injuries in adolescents. Workplace Health Saf. 2016;64(9):404–413.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Heitmann K, Svendsen HC, Sporsheim IH, et al. Nausea in pregnancy: attitudes among pregnant women and general practitioners on treatment and pregnancy care. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2016;34(1):13–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Bohatko-Naismith J, Guest M, James C, et al. Australian general practitioners’ perspective on the role of the workplace Return-to-Work Coordinator. Aust J Prim Health. 2018;24(6):502–509.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Elbers NA, Chase R, Craig A, et al. Health care professionals’ attitudes towards evidence-based medicine in the workers’ compensation setting: a cohort study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017;17:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. King J, Cleary C, Harris MG, et al. Employment-related information for clients receiving mental health services and clinicians. Work. 2011;39(3):291–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Unger D, Kregel J. Employers’ knowledge and utilization of accommodations. Work. 2003;21(1):5–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. McDowell C, Fossey E. Workplace accommodations for people with mental illness: a scoping review. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25(1):197–206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Corbière M, Mazaniello-Chézol M, Bastien MF, et al. Stakeholders’ role and actions in the return-to-work process of workers on sick-leave due to common mental disorders: a scoping review. J Occup Rehabil. 2020;30(3):381–419.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Joanna Liu for library support and to acknowledge the following people for helping to determine relevance of non-English language studies: Morgane Le Pouesard, Heather Johnston, Paolo Maselli, Joanna Liu, Hitomi Suzuki, Rina Shoki, Sylvia Snoeck-Krygsman, Mariska de Wit, and Tania Bruno.

Funding

This project was funded by a Research Grant from the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Work & Health, 400 University Avenue, suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada

    Andrea D. Furlan, Shireen Harbin, Emma Irvin, Colette N. Severin & Margaret Tiong

  2. KITE, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Andrea D. Furlan

  3. Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Andrea D. Furlan & Anil Adisesh

  4. Faculty of Medicine, State University of Maringa, Avenida Colombo, 5790, CEP 87020-900, Maringa, PR, Brazil

    Fabricio F. Vieira

  5. Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Emma Irvin & Behdin Nowrouzi-Kia

  6. Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Emma Irvin & Behdin Nowrouzi-Kia

  7. Occupational Medicine, St Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Anil Adisesh

Authors
  1. Andrea D. Furlan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shireen Harbin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fabricio F. Vieira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Emma Irvin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Colette N. Severin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Behdin Nowrouzi-Kia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Margaret Tiong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Anil Adisesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea D. Furlan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 29 kb)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 16 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Furlan, A.D., Harbin, S., Vieira, F.F. et al. Primary Care Physicians’ Learning Needs in Returning Ill or Injured Workers to Work. A Scoping Review. J Occup Rehabil 32, 591–619 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-022-10043-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-022-10043-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation