Advertisement

Functioning and Disability Evaluation as an Asset for Vocational Rehabilitation in Neurological Conditions

  • Matilde Leonardi
  • Davide Sattin
  • Rui Quintas
  • Ambra Mara Giovannetti
  • Alberto RaggiEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Handbooks in Health, Work, and Disability book series (SHHDW)

Abstract

The purpose of vocational rehabilitation (VR) is to facilitate the return to work (RTW) or the maintenance of a work position of a person with a disability. VR interventions have to start with a preliminary evaluation of a person’s functioning, but despite the calls to use instruments based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), no data have yet been reported using a standardised ICF-based evaluation of functioning. In this chapter we aim to connect ICF-based evaluation of functioning and disability with experiences of its application to VR in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI), highlighting elements of strength and weakness. ICF-based descriptions of the three neurological conditions, together with identification of key issues related to RTW and job maintenance as well as available and published experiences with VR programmes, are reported. The impact of a tailored rehabilitation plan for return to work has also been measured in terms of indirect costs. Indirect costs, i.e. those related to lower employment rates and reduced productivity, are responsible for 32 % of total MS costs, 8 % of total stroke costs and 59 % of total TBI costs. VR has proven to be effective in 48 % of clients with MS, 12–48 % of those with stroke and 38–84 % of those with TBI. Paucity of available data, inconsistency in “work” definitions, lack of systematic reporting of VR programmes’ duration and almost complete absence of cost-effectiveness analyses are still critical issues that future research activities will need to address.

Keywords

Multiple Sclerosis Traumatic Brain Injury Multiple Sclerosis Patient Expand Disability Status Scale Traumatic Brain Injury Patient 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    International Labor Organization. Vocational rehabilitation and employment of disabled persons. International labor conference, 86th session. Geneva: ILO; 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    British Society of Rehabilitation Medicine. Vocational rehabilitation: the way forward. London: BSRM; 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Selander J. Unemployed sick leavers and vocational rehabilitation. A person level study based on a national social insurance material. Dissertation from the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine. Stockholm: Karolinska Institute; 1999.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gobelet C, Franchignoni F. Vocational rehabilitation. Paris: Springer; 2006.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ekholm J, Schüldt Ekholm K. Guest editorial: vocational rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:113–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chamberlain MA, Fialka Moser V, Schüldt Ekholm K, O’Connor RJ, Herceg M, Ekholm J. Vocational rehabilitation: an educational review. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:856–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    World Health Organization. World report on disability. Geneva: WHO; 2011.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    World Health Organization. International classification of functioning disability and health. Geneva: WHO; 2001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Escorpizo R, Finger ME, Glässel A, Gradinger F, Lückenkemper M, Cieza A. A systematic review of functioning in vocational rehabilitation using the international classification of functioning, disability and health. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21:134–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gustavsson A, Svensson M, Jakobi F, Allgulander C, Alonso J, Beghi E, CDBE 2010 Study Group, et al. Cost of disorders of the brain in Europe 2010. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011;21:718–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leonardi M, Bickenbach J, Ustun TB, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, MHADIE Consortium. The definition of disability: what is in a name? Lancet. 2006;368:1219–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ustün TB, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, Rehm J, Kennedy C, Epping-Jordan J, Saxena S, von Korff M, Pull C, WHO/NIH Joint Project. Developing the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Bull World Health Organ. 2010;88:815–23.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Post MW, de Witte LP, Reichrath E, Verdonschot MM, Wijlhuizen GJ, Perenboom RJ. Development and validation of IMPACT-S, an ICF-based questionnaire to measure activities and participation. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40:620–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Østerås N, Brage S, Garratt A, Benth JS, Natvig B, Gulbrandsen P. Functional ability in a population: normative survey data and reliability for the ICF based Norwegian Function Assessment Scale. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:278.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL. The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32:705–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iwarsson S. The Housing Enabler: an objective tool for assessing accessibility. Br J Occup Ther. 1999;62:491–7.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Emery J, Crump C, Bors P. Reliability and validity of two instruments designed to assess the walking and bicycling suitability of sidewalks and roads. Am J Health Promot. 2003;18:38–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bower JH, Howlett W, Maro VP, Wangai H, Sirima N, Reyburn H. A screening instrument to measure the prevalence of neurological disability in resource-poor settings. Neuroepidemiology. 2009;32:313–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cohen JA, Reingold SC, Polman CH, Wolinsky JS, International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in Multiple Sclerosis. Disability outcome measures in multiple sclerosis clinical trials: current status and future prospects. Lancet Neurol. 2012;11:467–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology. 1983;33:1444–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cutter GR, Baier ML, Rudick RA, Cookfair DL, Fischer JS, Petkau J, et al. Development of a multiple sclerosis functional composite as a clinical trial outcome measure. Brain. 1999;122:871–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ozakbas S, Ormeci B, Idiman E. Utilization of the multiple sclerosis functional composite in follow-up: relationship to disease phenotype, disability and treatment strategies. J Neurol Sci. 2005;232:65–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kalkers NF, Bergers L, de Groot V, Lazeron RH, van Walderveen MA, Uitdehaag BM, et al. Concurrent validity of the MS functional composite using MRI as a biological disease marker. Neurology. 2001;56:215–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Miller DM, Rudick RA, Cutter G, Baier M, Fischer JS. Clinical significance of the multiple sclerosis functional composite. Relationship to patient-reported quality of life. Arch Neurol. 2000;57:1319–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lublin FD. Disease free activity status. Mult Scler Relat Dis. 2012;1:6–7.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. II. Prognosis. Scott Med J. 1957;2:200–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mahoney F, Barthel D. Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schwartz CE, Bode RK, Quaranto BR, Vollmer T. The symptom inventory disability-specific short forms for multiple sclerosis: construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:1617–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wynia K, Middel B, Van Dijk JP, De Ruiter H, De Keyser J, Reijneveld SA. The Multiple Sclerosis impact Profile (MSIP). Development and testing psychometric properties of an ICF-based health measure. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30:261–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Haigh R, Tennant T, Biering-Sørensen F, Grimby G, Marincek C, Phillips S, et al. The use of outcome measures in physical medicine and rehabilitation within Europe. J Rehabil Med. 2001;33:273–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. In: Eisenberg MG, Grzesiak RC, editors. Advances in clinical rehabilitation. New York: Springer; 1987. p. 6–18.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Scandinavian Stroke Study Group. Multicenter trial of hemodilution in ischemic stroke. Background and study protocol. Stroke. 1985;16:885–90.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Katz S, Ford AB, Moskowitz RW, Jackson BA, Jaffe MW. Studies of illness in the aged. Index of ADL: a standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. JAMA. 1963;185:914–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Inouye M, Hashimoto H, Mio T, Sumino K. Influence of admission functional status on functional change after stroke rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;80:121–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hsueh IP, Lin JH, Jeng JS, Hsieh CL. Comparison of the psychometric characteristics of the functional independence measure, 5 item Barthel index, and 10 item Barthel index in patients with stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;73:188–90.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tur BS, Gursel YK, Yavuzer G, Kucukdeveci A, Arasil T. Rehabilitation outcome of Turkish stroke patients: in a team approach setting. Int J Rehabil Res. 2003;26:271–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    World Health Organization. International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Geneva: WHO; 1980.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Teasdale G, Jennet B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness: a practical scale. Lancet. 1974;2:81–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jennett B, Bond M. Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. Lancet. 1975;1:480–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Willer B, Ottenbacher KJ, Coad ML. The community integration questionnaire. A comparative examination. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;73:103–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Crawford S, Wenden FJ, Wade DT. The Rivermead head injury follow up questionnaire: a study of a new rating scale and other measures to evaluate outcome after head injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1996;60:510–4.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rappaport M, Hall KM, Hopkins K. Disability rating scale for severe head trauma: coma to community. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982;63:118–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hall KM, Mann N, High W, Wright J, Kreutzer J, Wood D. Functional measures after traumatic brain injury: ceiling effects of FIM, FIM1FAM, DRS and CIQ. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 1996;11:27–39.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Malkmus D. Cognitive assessment and goal setting. In: Hagan C, Malkmus D, Durham P, editors. Rehabilitation of the head injured adult: comprehensive physical management. Downey: Professional Staff Assoc Rancho Los Amigos Hospital; 1979.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cerniauskaite M, Quintas R, Boldt C, Raggi A, Cieza A, Bickenbach J, Leonardi M. Systematic literature review on ICF from 2001 to 2009: its use, implementation and operationalisation. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33:281–309.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Raggi A, Leonardi M, Cabello M, Bickenbach JE. Application of ICF in clinical contexts across Europe. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32 Suppl 1:17–22.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Anner J, Schwegler U, Kunz R, Trezzini B, de Boer W. Evaluation of work disability and the international classification of functioning, disability and health: what to expect and what not. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:470.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Coenen M, Cieza A, Freeman J, Khan F, Miller D, Weise A, et al. The development of ICF Core Sets for multiple sclerosis: results of the international consensus conference. J Neurol. 2011;258:1477–88.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Conrad A, Coenen M, Schmalz H, Kesselring J, Cieza A. Validation of the comprehensive ICF core set for multiple sclerosis from the perspective of occupational therapists. Scand J Occup Ther. 2012;19:468–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Conrad A, Coenen M, Schmalz H, Kesselring J, Cieza A. Validation of the comprehensive ICF core set for multiple sclerosis from the perspective of physical therapists. Phys Ther. 2012;92:799–820.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Khan F, Pallant JF. Use of International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) to describe patient-reported disability in multiple sclerosis and identification of relevant environmental factors. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39:63–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Holper L, Coenen M, Weise A, Stucki G, Cieza A, Kesselring J. Characterization of functioning in multiple sclerosis using the ICF. J Neurol. 2010;257:103–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Svestkova O, Angerova Y, Sladkova P, Keclikova B, Bickenbach JE, Raggi A. Functioning and disability in multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32 Suppl 1:59–67.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Geyh S, Cieza A, Schouten J, Dickson H, Frommelt P, Omar Z, et al. ICF Core Sets for stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2004;44(Suppl):135–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Algurén B, Lundgren-Nilsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. Functioning of stroke survivors–a validation of the ICF core set for stroke in Sweden. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32:551–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Goljar N, Burger H, Vidmar G, Marincek C, Krizaj J, Chatterji S, et al. Functioning and disability in stroke. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32 Suppl 1:50–8.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Quintas R, Cerniauskaite M, Ajovalasit D, Sattin D, Boncoraglio G, Parati EA, Leonardi M. Describing functioning, disability, and health with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Brief Core Set for Stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;91 Suppl 1:14–21.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Laxe S, Zasler N, Selb M, Tate R, Tormos JM, Bernabeu M. Development of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health core sets for traumatic brain injury: an international consensus process. Brain Inj. 2013;27:379–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Koskinen S, Hokkinen EM, Sarajuuri J, Alaranta H. Applicability of the ICF checklist to traumatically brain-injured patients in post-acute rehabilitation settings. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39:467–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Aiachini B, Pisoni C, Cieza A, Cazzulani B, Giustini A, Pistarini C. Developing ICF core set for subjects with traumatic brain injury: an Italian clinical perspective. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2010;46:27–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Svestkova O, Angerova Y, Sladkova P, Bickenbach JE, Raggi A. Functioning and disability in traumatic brain injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32 Suppl 1:68–77.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Laxe S, Zasler N, Tschiesner U, López-Blazquez R, Tormos JM, Bernabeu M. ICF use to identify common problems on a TBI neurorehabilitation unit in Spain. NeuroRehabilitation. 2011;29:99–110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    von Holst H. Traumatic brain injury: evidence-based management and epidemiology updates. Neuroepidemiology. 2009;33:314–5.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Rauch A, Cieza A, Stucki G. How to apply the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) for rehabilitation management in clinical practice. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2008;44:329–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Scarponi F, Sattin D, Leonardi M, Raggi A, Zampolini M. The description of severe traumatic brain injury in light of the ICF classification. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31 Suppl 1:134–43.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Shames J, Treger I, Ring H, Giaquinto S. Return to work following traumatic brain injury: trends and challenges. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29:1387–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    United Nations. UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. New York: United Nations; 2006.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    International Labour Organization. ILO vocational rehabilitation and employment (disabled persons) convention (no. 159) and recommendation (no. 168): United Nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities/International Labour Office. Geneva: ILO; 2008.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    UN General Assembly. International covenant on economic, social and cultural rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty series, vol. 993, p. 3. Available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b36c0.html. Accessed 21 Jan 2014.
  70. 70.
    Schiavolin S, Leonardi M, Giovannetti AM, Antozzi C, Brambilla L, Confalonieri P, et al. Factors related to difficulties with employment in patients with multiple sclerosis: a review of 2002–2011 literature. Int J Rehabil Res. 2013;36:105–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Roessler RT, Rumrill PD. Multiple sclerosis and employment barriers: a systemic perspective on diagnosis and intervention. Work. 2003;21:17–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Neath J, Roessler RT, McMahon BT, Rumrill PD. Patterns in perceived employment discrimination for adults with multiple sclerosis. Work. 2007;29:255–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Rumrill PD, Roessler RT, McMahon BT, Hennessey ML, Neath J. Gender as a differential indicator of employment discrimination experiences of Americans with multiple sclerosis. Work. 2007;29:303–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Daniel K, Wolfe CD, Busch MA, McKevitt C. What are the social consequences of stroke for working-aged adults? A systematic review. Stroke. 2009;40:e431–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Wozniak MA, Kittner SJ. Return to work after ischemic stroke: a methodological review. Neuroepidemiology. 2002;21:159–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Treger I, Shames J, Giaquinto S, Ring H. Return to work in stroke patients. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29:1397–403.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Howard G, Till JS, Toole JF, Matthews C, Truscott L. Factors influencing return to work following cerebral infarction. JAMA. 1985;253:226–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wozniak MA, Kittner SJ, Price TR, Hebel JR, Sloan MA, Gardner JF. Stroke location is not associated with return to work after first ischemic stroke. Stroke. 1999;30:2568–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Black-Schaffer RM, Osberg JS. Return to work after stroke: development of a predictive model. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1990;71:285–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Corr S, Wilmer S. Returning to work after a stroke: an important but neglected area. Br J Occup Ther. 2003;66:186–92.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Medin J, Barajas J, Ekberg K. Stroke patients’ experiences of return to work. Disabil Rehabil. 2006;28:1051–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Lock S, Jordan L, Bryan K, Maxim J. Work after stroke: focusing on barriers and enablers. Disabil Soc. 2005;20:33–47.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Alaszewski A, Alaszewski H, Potter J, Penhale B. Working after a stroke: survivors’ experiences and perceptions of barriers to and facilitators of the return to paid employment. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29:1858–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Van Velzen JM, van Bennekom CA, Edelaar MJ, Sluiter JK, Frings-Dresen MH. How many people return to work after acquired brain injury? A systematic review. Brain Inj. 2009;23:473–88.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Ruffolo C, Freidland J, Dawson D, Colantonio A, Lindsay P. Mild TBI from motor vehicle accidents: factors associated with return to work. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80:392–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Rao N, Rosenthal M, Cronin-Stubbs D, Lambert R, Barnes P, Swanson B. Return to work after rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 1990;4:49–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Gilworth G, Eyres S, Carey A, Bhakta BB, Tennant A. Working with a brain injury: personal experiences of returning to work following a mild or moderate brain injury. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40:334–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Rubenson C, Svensson E, Linddahl I, Bjorklund A. Experiences of returning to work after acquired brain injury. Scand J Occup Ther. 2007;14:205–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Wehman P, Targett P, West M, Kregel J. Production work and employment for persons with traumatic brain injury: what have we learned? J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2005;20:115–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Klonoff PS, Watt LM, Dawson LK, Henderson SW, Gehrels JA, Wethe JV. Psychosocial outcomes 1–7 years after comprehensive milieu-oriented neurorehabilitation: the role of pre-injury status. Brain Inj. 2006;20:601–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Keren O, Cohen M, Lazar-Zwecker I, Gorswasser Z. Tracheotomy in severe TBI patients: sequelae and relation to vocational outcome. Brain Inj. 2001;15:531–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Keyser-Marcus L, Bricout J, Wehman P, Campbell L, Cifu D, Englander J, et al. Acute predictors of return to employment after traumatic brain injury: a longitudinal follow-up. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:635–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Walker WC, Marwitz J, Kreutzer J, Hart T, Novack T. Occupational categories and return to work after traumatic brain injury: a multicenter study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:1576–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Khan F, Ng L, Turner-Stokes L. Effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation intervention on the return to work and employment of persons with multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;21, CD007256.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Sweetland J, Howse E, Playford ED. A systematic review of research undertaken in vocational rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34:2031–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Yorkston KM, Johnson K, Klasner ER, Amtmann D, Kuehn CM, Dudgeon B. Getting the work done: a qualitative study of individuals with multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25:369–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Simmons RD, Tribe KL, McDonald EA. Living with multiple sclerosis: longitudinal changes in employment and the importance of symptom management. J Neurol. 2010;257:926–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Roessler R, Rumrill P. Strategies for enhancing career maintenance self-efficacy of people with multiple sclerosis. J Rehabil. 1994;60:54–9.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Crooks V, Stone S, Owen M. Multiple sclerosis and academic work: socio-spatial strategies adopted to maintain employment. J Occup Sci. 2009;16:25–31.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Pack TG, Szirony GM. Predicting readiness to return to work in a population with multiple sclerosis. J Vocat Rehabil. 2009;31:91–105.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Chiu CY, Chan F, Bishop M, Cardoso ED, O’Neill J. State vocational rehabilitation services and employment in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2013;19:1655–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Fraser RT, Johnson EK, Clemmons DC, Getter A, Johnson KL, Gibbons L. Vocational rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis (MS): a profile of clients seeking services. Work. 2003;21:69–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Sweetland J, Riazi A, Cano SJ, Playford ED. Vocational rehabilitation services for people with multiple sclerosis: what patients want from clinicians and employers. Mult Scler. 2007;13:1183–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Baldwin C, Brusco NK. The effect of vocational rehabilitation on return-to-work rates post stroke: a systematic review. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011;18:562–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    McMahon R, Crown D. Return to work factors following a stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 1998;5:54–60.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Kempers E. Preparing the young stroke survivor for return to work. Top Stroke Rehabil. 1994;1:65–73.Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Leng CM. Description of a return-to-work occupational therapy programme for stroke rehabilitation in Singapore. Occup Ther Int. 2008;15:87–99.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Bisiker J, Millinchip K. Developing a work rehabilitation project: “equal pathways to work”. Br J Occup Ther. 2007;70:259–63.Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Tyerman A. Vocational rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury: models and services. NeuroRehabilitation. 2012;31:51–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Ben-Yishay T, Silver SM, Piasetsky E, Rattok J. Relationship between employability and vocational outcome after intensive holistic cognitive rehabilitation. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 1987;2:35–48.Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Johnson RP. Return to work after severe head injury. Int Disabil Stud. 1987;9:49–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Tyerman A, Young K. Vocational rehabilitation after severe traumatic brain injury: II Specialist interventions and outcomes. J Appl Occup Psychol Employ Disabil. 2000;2:13–20.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Wehman PH, Kreutzer JS, West MD, Sherron PD, Zasler ND, Groah CH, Stonnington HH, Burns CT, Sale PR. Return to work for persons with traumatic brain injury: a supported employment approach. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1990;71:1047–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Wall JR, Rosenthal M, Niemczura JG. Community-based training after acquired brain injury: preliminary findings. Brain Inj. 1998;12:215–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Murphy L, Chamberlain E, Weir J, Berry A, Nathaniel-James D, Agnew R. Effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation following acquired brain injury: preliminary evaluation of a UK specialist rehabilitation programme. Brain Inj. 2006;20:1119–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    O’Neill JH, Zuger RR, Fields A, Fraser R, Pruce T. The program without walls: innovative approach to state agency vocational rehabilitation of persons with traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85 Suppl 2:68–72.Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Curl RM, Fraser RT, Cook RG, Clemmons D. Traumatic brain injury vocational rehabilitation: preliminary findings for the coworker as trainer project. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 1996;11:75–85.Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Buffington ALH, Malec JF. The vocational rehabilitation continuum: maximising outcomes though bridging the gap from hospital to community based services. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 1997;12:1–13.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Malec JF, Moessner AM. Replicated positive results for the VCC model of vocational intervention after ABI within the social model of disability. Brain Inj. 2006;20:227–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    O’Brien L. Achieving a successful and sustainable return to the workforce after ABI: a client-centred approach. Brain Inj. 2007;21:465–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Trexler LE, Trexler LC, Malec JF, Klyce D, Parrott D. Prospective randomized controlled trial of resource facilitation on community participation and vocational outcome following brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2010;25:440–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Abrams D, Barker LT, Haffey W, Nelson H. The economics of return to work for survivors of traumatic brain injury. Vocational services are worth the investment. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 1993;8:59–76.Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Kendall E, Muenchberger H, Gee T. Vocational rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury: a quantitative synthesis of outcome studies. J Vocat Rehabil. 2006;25:149–60.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Fadyl JK, McPherson KM. Approaches to vocational rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury: a review of the evidence. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2009;24:195–212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Conclave M, Fusaro G, Sala M, Martinuzzi A, Russo E, Frare M, et al. The ICF and Labour Policies Project: the first Italian nation-wide experience of ICF implementation in the labour sector. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31 Suppl 1:16–21.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Decreto del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri 13 gennaio 2000. Atto di indirizzo e coordinamento in materia di collocamento obbligatorio dei disabili, a norma dell’art. 1, comma 4, della legge 12 marzo 1999, no. 68. http://www.handylex.org/stato/d130100.shtml. Accessed 21 Jan 2014.
  127. 127.
    Rusbridge SL, Walmsley NC, Griffiths SB, Wilford PA, Rees JH. Predicting outcomes of vocational rehabilitation in patients with brain tumours. Psychooncology. 2013;22:1907–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Holland P, Lane S, Whitehead M, Marson AG, Jacoby A. Labor market participation following onset of seizures and early epilepsy: findings from a UK cohort. Epilepsia. 2009;50:1030–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Chin PS, Berg AT, Spencer SS, Sperling MR, Haut SR, Langfitt JT, et al. Employment outcomes following resective epilepsy surgery. Epilepsia. 2007;48:2253–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Linde M, Gustavsson A, Stovner LJ, Steiner TJ, Barré J, Katsarava Z, et al. The cost of headache disorders in Europe: the Eurolight project. Eur J Neurol. 2012;19:703–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Michel P, Dartigues JF, Duru G, Moreau J, Salamon R, Henry P. Incremental absenteeism due to headaches in migraine: results from the Mig-Access French national cohort. Cephalalgia. 1999;19:503–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Stewart WF, Wood GC, Manack A, Varon SF, Buse DC, Lipton RB. Employment and work impact of chronic migraine and episodic migraine. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52:8–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Ferrarina S. Analysis of the legal meaning of Article 27 of the UN CRPD: key challenges for adapted work settings. Cornell University ILR, GLADNET Collection 3-14-2012. Available at: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/gladnetcollect/. Accessed 21 Jan 2014.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matilde Leonardi
    • 1
  • Davide Sattin
    • 1
  • Rui Quintas
    • 1
  • Ambra Mara Giovannetti
    • 1
  • Alberto Raggi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Neurology, Public Health and Disability UnitNeurological Institute C. Besta IRCCS FoundationMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations