Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Disentangling the Disability Quagmire in Psychological Injury: Part 1—Disability and Return to Work: Theories, Methods, and Applications

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper critically reviews and integrates multidisciplinary literature informing conceptualization and determination of disability and return to work from a psychological injury perspective. It focuses on dissecting and disentangling the ambiguities and complexities of theories and definitions of disability, impairment, and return to work, highlighting the conceptual quagmires that affect both research and clinical methodology in the field. The paper discusses the strengths and limitations of the main theoretical perspectives on disability and return to work—social, medical, and biopsychosocial—and the associated applied perspectives, including the legal/administrative, clinical, and research oriented. It provides a special focus on the Americans with Disabilities Act and the American Medical Association’s Guides for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment as leading applied perspectives. The paper also highlights the features and methodological implications of the integrative framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (World Health Organization, International classification of functioning, disabilities and health, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2001). Finally, it draws implications for the field of psychological injury in a legal context.

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

  • Altman, B. M. (2001). Disability definitions, models, classification schemes, and applications. In G. L. Albrecht, K. D. Seelman, & M. Bury (Eds.) Handbook of disability studies (pp. 97–122). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Medical Association (1994). Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment (4th ed.). Chicago: AMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Medical Association (2001). Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment (5th ed.). Chicago: AMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Medical Association (2007). Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment (6th ed.). Chicago: AMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: APA text revision.

    Google Scholar 

  • Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 USCA Section 12101 et seq. (West 1993).

  • Baldwin, M. L., Johnson, W. G., & Butler, R. J. (1996). The error of using returns-to-work to measure the outcomes of health care. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 29, 632–641.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bergner, M., Bobbitt, R. A., Carter, W. B., & Gilson, B. S. (1981). The sickness impact profile: Development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical Care, 19, 787–805.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bickenbach, J. E., Chatterji, S., Badley, E. M., & Üstün, T. B. (1999). Models of disablement, universalism and the international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Social Science & Medicine, 48, 1173–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boorse, C. (1975). On the distinction between disease and illness. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 5, 49–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boorse, C. (1977). Health as a theoretical concept. Philosophy & Science, 44, 542–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, E. N., & Pope, A. M. (Eds.). (1997). Enabling America: Assessing the role of rehabilitation science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  • Bruyère, S. M., Van Looy, S., & Peterson, D. (2005). The international classification of functioning, disability and health: Contemporary literature overview. Rehabilitation Psychology, 50, 113–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrigan, P. W., Larson, J. E., & Sachiko, A. K. (2007). Mental illness stigma and the fundamental components of supported employment. Rehabilitation Psychology, 52, 451–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crook, J., Milner, R., Schultz, I. Z., & Stringer, B. (2002). Determinants of occupational disability following a low back injury: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 12, 277–295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DePoy, E., & Gilson, S. F. (2004). Rethinking disability: Principles for professional and social change. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donoghue, C. (2003). Challenging the authority of the medical definition of disability: An analysis of the resistance to the social constructionist paradigm. Disability & Society, 18, 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engel, G. L. (1977). The need for a new medical model: A challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196, 129–136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fougeyrollas, P., & Beauregard, L. (2001). An interactive person–environment social creation. In G. L. Albrecht, K. D. Seelman, & M. Bury (Eds.) Handbook of disability studies (pp. 171–194). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franche, R.-L., & Krause, N. (2002). Readiness for return to work following injury or illness: Conceptualizing the interpersonal impact of health care, workplace and insurance factors. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 12, 233–256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gilson, B. S., Gilson, J. S., Bergner, M., Bobbitt, R. A., Kressel, S., Pollard, W. E., et al. (1975). The Sickness Impact Profile: Development of an outcome measure of health care. American Journal of Public Health, 65, 1304–1310.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goldner, E., Bilsker, D., Gilbert, M., Myette, L., Corbière, M., & Dewa, C. S. (2004). Disability management, return to work and treatment. Healthcare Papers, 5(2), 76–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst, R. (2003). The international disability rights movement and the ICF. Disability & Rehabilitation, 25, 572–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imrie, R. (2004). Demystifying disability: A review of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Sociology of Health & Illness, 26, 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J., Hass, R. G., & Bailey, J. (1988). Attitudinal ambivalence and behavior toward people with disabilities. In H. E. Yuker (Ed.) Attitudes toward persons with disabilities (pp. 47–57). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause, N., Dasinger, L. K., Deegan, L. J., Rudolph, L., & Brand, R. J. (2001a). Psychosocial job factors and return-to-work after compensated low back injury: A disability phase-specific analysis. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 40, 374–392.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krause, N., Frank, J. W., Sullivan, T. J., Dasinger, L. K., & Sinclair, S. J. (2001b). Determinants of duration of disability and return to work after work-related injury and illness: Challenges for future research. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 40, 464–484.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Linton, S. J. (2001). Occupational psychological factors increase the risk for back pain: A systematic review. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 11, 53–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Linton, S. J., Gross, D., Schultz, I. Z., Main, C. J., Côté, P., Pransky, G., et al. (2005). Prognosis and the identification of workers risking disability: Research issues and directions for future research. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15, 459–474.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Livneh, H. (1988). Rehabilitation goals: Their hierarchical and multifaceted nature. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 19(3), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livneh, H., & Parker, R. M. (2007). Psychological adaptation to disability: Perspectives from chaos and complexity theory. In A. E. Dell Orto & P. W. Power (Eds.) The psychological and social impact of illness and disability ((pp. 611–633)5th ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longmore, P. K. (1995). Medical decision making and people with disabilities: A clash of cultures. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, 23, 82–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, B. J., & Bowers, B. J. (2007). Understanding how disability is defined and conceptualized in the literature. In A. E. Dell Orto & P. W. Power (Eds.) The psychological and social impact of illness and disability ((pp. 11–21)5th ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, M. (1998). Whose body is it anyway? Pressures and control for women with learning disabilities. Disability & Society, 13, 557–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagi, S. Z. (1965). Some conceptual issues in disability and rehabilitation. In M. Sussman (Ed.) Sociology and rehabilitation (pp. 100–113). Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagi, S. Z. (1977). The disabled and rehabilitation services: A national overview. American Rehabilitation, 2(5), 26–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagi, S. Z. (1991). Disability concepts revisited: Implications for prevention. In A. M. Pope & A. R. Tarlov (Eds.) Disability in America: Toward a national agenda for prevention (pp. 307–327). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olkin, R., & Pledger, C. (2003). Can disability studies and psychology join hands? American Psychologist, 58, 296–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, D. B. (2005). International classification of functioning, disability and health: An introduction for rehabilitation psychologists. Rehabilitation Psychology, 50, 105–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, A. M., & Tarlov, R. A. (Eds.) (1991). Disability in America: Toward a national agenda for prevention. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  • Pransky, G., Gatchel, R. J., Linton, S. J., & Loisel, P. (2005). Improving return to work research. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15, 453–457.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prochaska, J. O., Velicer, W. F., Rossi, J. S., Goldstein, M. G., Marcus, B. H., Rakowski, W., et al. (1994). Stages of change and decisional balance for twelve problem behaviors. Health Psychology, 13, 39–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, G. M., Lux, J. B., Bufka, L. F., Trask, C., Peterson, D. B., Stark, S., et al. (2005). Operationalizing the international classification of functioning, disability and health in clinical settings. Rehabilitation Psychology, 50, 122–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, I. Z. (2005). Impairment and occupational disability in research and practice. In I. Z. Schultz & R. J. Gatchel (Eds.) Handbook of complex occupational disability claims: Early risk identification, intervention and prevention (pp. 25–41). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, I. Z., Crook, J., Fraser, K., & Joy, P. W. (2000). Models of diagnosis and rehabilitation in musculoskeletal pain-related occupational disability. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 10, 271–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, I. Z., Stowell, A. W., Feuerstein, M., & Gatchel, R. J. (2007). Models of return to work for musculoskeletal disorders. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 17, 327–352.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Siminski, P. (2003). Patterns of disability and norms of participation through the life course: Empirical support for a social model of disability. Disability & Society, 18, 707–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. F. (2001). Disability, society, and the individual. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. F., & Smart, D. W. (2007). Models of disability: Implications for the counseling profession. In A. E. Dell Orto & P. W. Power (Eds.) The psychological and social impact of illness and disability ((pp. 75–100)5th ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stowell, A. M., & McGeary, D. D. (2005). Musculoskeletal injury: A three-stage continuum from cause to disability to decision. In I. Z. Schultz & R. J. Gatchel (Eds.) Handbook of complex occupational disability claims: Early risk identification, intervention and prevention (pp. 117–39). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tate, D. G., & Pledger, C. (2003). An integrative conceptual framework of disability. American Psychologist, 58, 289–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull, H. R., & Stowe, M. J. (2001). A taxonomy for organizing the core concepts according to their underlying principles. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 12, 177–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbrugge, L. M., & Jette, A. M. (1994). The disablement process. Social Science & Medicine, 38, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization (WHO) (1980). International classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps (ICIDH). Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization (WHO) (1997). International classification of impairments, activities and participation (ICIDH-2). Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization (WHO) (1999). ICIDH-2 International classification of functioning and disability. Beta-2 draft, full version. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization (WHO) (2001). International classification of functioning, disabilities and health problems. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, G., & Chapman, C. R. (2007). Pain, affect, nonlinear dynamical systems, and chronic pain: Bringing order to disorder. In G. Young, A. W. Kane, & K. Nicholson (Eds.) Causality of psychological injury: Presenting evidence in court (pp. 197–241). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Young, A. E., Roessler, R. T., Wasiak, R., McPherson, K. M., van Poppel, M. N. M., & Anema, J. R. (2005a). A developmental conceptualization of return to work. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15, 557–568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Young, A. E., Wasiak, R., Roessler, R. T., McPherson, K. M., Anema, J. R., & van Poppel, N. M. (2005b). Return-to-work outcomes following work disability: Stakeholder motivations, interests and concerns. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15, 543–556.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zuberbier, O. A., Hunt, D. G., Kozlowski, A. J., Berkowitz, J., Schultz, I. Z., Crook, J. M., et al. (2001). Commentary on the AMA Guides’ lumbar impairment validity checks. Spine, 26, 2735–2737.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to express special appreciation to the Editor of Psychological Injury and Law, Gerald Young, for his insightful comments and suggested improvements to the paper. We also would like to thank Natalie Moore, Alison Stewart, and Alanna Winter for their valuable assistance with research and technical aspects of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, and Special Education, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada

    Izabela Z. Schultz

Authors
  1. Izabela Z. Schultz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Izabela Z. Schultz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schultz, I.Z. Disentangling the Disability Quagmire in Psychological Injury: Part 1—Disability and Return to Work: Theories, Methods, and Applications. Psychol. Inj. and Law 1, 94–102 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-008-9011-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-008-9011-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation