Effect of sense of coherence on long-term work participation among rehabilitation patients: a longitudinal study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/jrm.v55.11982Keywords:
Rehabilitation, sense of coherence, coping resources, physical and mental functioning, work participation, musculoskeletalAbstract
Objective: To investigate the causal effect of sense of coherence on long-term work participation after rehabilitation, including stratification by age and diagnoses.
Design: Longitudinal cohort study.
Participants: Patients aged ≤ 60 years, employed and accepted for somatic interprofessional rehabilitation in 2015 (n = 192).
Methods: Patients reported sense of coherence before rehabilitation in 2015 and mental and physical functioning in 2016. Register data were used to measure work participation during 2018 and days working without social security benefits during 2016–18. Regression models were used to explore the total effect of sense of coherence and the possible mediation of functioning. Results are reported as odds ratios (95% confidence intervals).
Results: During 2018, 77% of the total study cohort participated in work activities. The subgroup with musculoskeletal diagnoses had the fewest days of working without social security benefits. A causal relationship was found between sense of coherence and long-term work participation. Some of the effect of sense of coherence was mediated by mental functioning. The total effect of sense of coherence was strongest for patients with musculo-skeletal diagnoses (work participation: 1.11 (1.05, 1.17), days working without social security benefits: 1.05 (0.01, 109)).
Conclusion: Improving coping resources may be beneficial to facilitate long-term work participation after injury or illness, especially for individuals with musculoskeletal diagnoses.
Downloads
References
van der Noordt M, H IJ, Droomers M, Proper KI. Health effects of em-ployment: a systematic review of prospective studies. Occup Environ Med 2014; 71: 730-736.
https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2013-101891 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2013-101891
Modini M, Joyce S, Mykletun A, Christensen H, Bryant RA, Mitchell PB, et al. The mental health benefits of employment: results of a systemat-ic meta-review. Australas Psychiatry 2016; 24: 331-336.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1039856215618523 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1039856215618523
Waddell G, Burton K. Is work good for your health and well-being? Lon-fon: TSO (The stationary Office); 2006.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Sickness, Disability and Work: Breaking the Barriers. A synthesis of findings ac-ross OECD countries. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2011.
Stucki G. Advancing the rehabilitation sciences. Front Rehabil Sci 2021; 1: 1-4.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2020.617749 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2020.617749
Strand LI, Ljunggren AE, Haldorsen EM, Espehaug B. The impact of physical function and pain on work status at 1-year follow-up in pati-ents with back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001; 26: 800-808.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200104010-00022 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200104010-00022
Arndt V, Koch-Gallenkamp L, Bertram H, Eberle A, Holleczek B, Pritzku-leit R, et al. Return to work after cancer. A multi-regional population-based study from Germany. Acta Oncol 2019; 58: 811-818.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2018.1557341 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2018.1557341
Nascimento LR, Scianni AA, Ada L, Fantauzzi MO, Hirochi TL, Teixeira-Salmela LF. Predictors of return to work after stroke: a prospective, observational cohort study with 6 months follow-up. Disabil Rehabil 2021; 43: 525-529.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2019.1631396 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2019.1631396
Musculoskeletal health [database on the internet]. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/musculoskeletal-conditions. 2022. [cited 2023 Jan 2]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/musculoskeletal-conditions.
Sick leave, annual statistics (Sykefraværsstatistikk - Årsstatistikk): NAV. [cited 2023 Feb 27]. Available from: https://www.nav.no/no/nav-og-samfunn/statistikk/sykefravar-statistikk/sykefravaersstatistikk-arsstatistikk.
Busch MA, Coshall C, Heuschmann PU, McKevitt C, Wolfe CD. Sociode-mographic differences in return to work after stroke: the South Lon-don Stroke Register (SLSR). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2009; 80: 888-893.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2008.163295 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2008.163295
Hodgson CL, Haines KJ, Bailey M, Barrett J, Bellomo R, Bucknall T, et al. Predictors of return to work in survivors of critical illness. J Crit Care 2018; 48: 21-25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.08.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.08.005
Geuskens GA, Hazes JM, Barendregt PJ, Burdorf A. Predictors of sick leave and reduced productivity at work among persons with early in-flammatory joint conditions. Scand J Work Environ Health 2008; 34: 420-429.
https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.1298 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.1298
Cancelliere C, Donovan J, Stochkendahl MJ, Biscardi M, Ammendolia C, Myburgh C, et al. Factors affecting return to work after injury or ill-ness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews. Chiropr Man Therap 2016; 24: 32.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-016-0113-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-016-0113-z
Gerg MJ, Hazak KM, Carrie BR, Melendez N, Jewell VD. Non-physical factors that impact return to work in individuals with upper extremity injuries: a scoping review. Work 2022; 73: 93-106.
https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-211059 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-211059
Weerdesteijn KHN, Schaafsma F, Bonefaas-Groenewoud K, Heymans M, Van der Beek A, Anema J. Predicting return to work after long-term sickness absence with subjective health complaints: a prospective cohort study. BMC Public Health 2020; 20: 1095.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09203-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09203-5
LoMartire R, Dahlstrom O, Bjork M, Vixner L, Frumento P, Constan L, et al. Predictors of sickness absence in a clinical population with chronic pain. J Pain 2021; 22: 1180-1194.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2021.03.145 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2021.03.145
Mittelmark MB, Bauer GF. Salutogenesis as a theory, as an orientation and as the sense of coherence. In: Mittelmark MB, Bauer GF, Vaan-drager L, Pelikan JM, Sagy S, Eriksson M, et al. (editors). The hand-book of salutogenesis. Second edn. Springer, Cham, Switzerland; 2022: p. 11-17.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79515-3_3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79515-3_3
Antonovsky A. Unraveling the mystery of health: how people manage stress and stay well. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1987.
Eriksson M, Lindstrom B. Antonovsky's sense of coherence scale and the relation with health: a systematic review. J Epidemiol Community Health 2006; 60: 376-381.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2005.041616 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2005.041616
Moen VP, Eide GE, Drageset J, Gjesdal S. Sense of coherence, disability, and health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional study of rehabili-tation patients in Norway. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2019; 100: 448-457.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.06.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.06.009
Berget AM, Moen VP, Hustoft M, Eide GE, Skouen JS, Strand LI, et al. Long-term change and predictors of change in physical and mental function after rehabilitation: a multi-centre study. J Rehabil Med 2023; 55: jrm00358.
https://doi.org/10.2340/jrm.v55.2809 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/jrm.v55.2809
Engstrom LG, Janson S. Predictors of work presence - sickness ab-sence in a salutogenic perspective. Work 2009; 33: 287-295. DOI: 10.3233/WOR-2009-0876.
https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2009-0876 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2009-0876
Hansen A, Edlund C, Henningsson M. Factors relevant to a return to work: a multivariate approach. Work 2006; 26: 179-190.
Lillefjell M, Jakobsen K. Sense of coherence as a predictor of work re-entry following multidisciplinary rehabilitation for individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. J Occup Health Psychol 2007; 12: 222-231.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.222 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.222
Eriksson M, Lindstrom B. Validity of Antonovsky's sense of coherence scale: a systematic review. J Epidemiol Comm Health 2005; 59: 460-466.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2003.018085 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2003.018085
Grevenstein D, Bluemke M. Measurement invariance of the SOC-13 sense of coherence scle across gender and age groups. Eur J Psychol Assess 2022; 38: 61-71.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000641 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000641
Garratt AM, Schmidt L, Mackintosh A, Fitzpatrick R. Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ 2002; 324: 1417.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1417 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1417
Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Buckingham JK, Russell IT. The SF36 he-alth survey questionnaire: an outcome measure suitable for routine use within the NHS? BMJ 1993; 306: 1440-1444.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.306.6890.1440 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.306.6890.1440
Ware JE, Jr., Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 Physical and mental health summary scales: a user's manual. Boston, MA: Health Assessment Lab.; 1994.
Ware JE, Jr., Kosinski M, Dewey JE. SF-36 health survey: manual and in-terpretation guide. Lincoln, RI: Quality Metric Inc; 2000.
Garratt AM, Stavem K. Measurement properties and normative data for the Norwegian SF-36: results from a general population survey. He-alth Qual Life Outcomes 2017; 15: 51.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0625-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0625-9
World Health Organisation. ICD-10: international statistical classification of diseases and related health problems: tenth revision. 2nd edn. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004.
Sandvik H, Ruths S, Hunskaar S, Blinkenberg J, Hetlevik O. Construction and validation of a morbidity index based on the International Classi-fication of Primary Care. Scand J Prim Health Care 2022; 40: 305-312.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2022.2097617 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2022.2097617
Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol 1986; 51: 1173-1182.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
Harrell Jr. FE. Regression Modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic and ordinal regression, and survival analysis. Second edn. New York: Springer; 2015.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19425-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19425-7
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2022.
Lydell M, Marklund B, Baigi A, Mattsson B, Mansson J. Return or no return - psychosocial factors related to sick leave in persons with muscu-loskeletal disorders: a prospective cohort study. Disabil Rehabil 2011; 33: 661-666.
https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2010.506237 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2010.506237
Liukkonen V, Virtanen P, Vahtera J, Suominen S, Sillanmaki L, Koskenvuo M. Employment trajectories and changes in sense of coherence. Eur J Public Health 2010; 20: 293-298.
https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckp171 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckp171
Galletta M, Cherchi M, Cocco A, Lai G, Manca V, Pau M, et al. Sense of coherence and physical health-related quality of life in Italian chronic patients: the mediating role of the mental component. BMJ Open 2019; 9: e030001.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030001
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Anne Mette Berget, Vegard Pihl Moen, Merethe Hustoft, Jörg Assmus, Liv Inger Strand, Jan Sture Skouen, Øystein Hetlevik
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All digitalized JRM contents is available freely online. The Foundation for Rehabilitation Medicine owns the copyright for all material published until volume 40 (2008), as from volume 41 (2009) authors retain copyright to their work and as from volume 49 (2017) the journal has been published Open Access, under CC-BY-NC licences (unless otherwise specified). The CC-BY-NC licenses allow third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for non-commercial purposes, provided proper attribution to the original work.
From 2024, articles are published under the CC-BY licence. This license permits sharing, adapting, and using the material for any purpose, including commercial use, with the condition of providing full attribution to the original publication.
