PTJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


PHYS THER
Vol. 76, No. 11, November 1996, pp. 1188-1201

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Beissner, K.
Right arrow Articles by McManis, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Beissner, K.
Right arrow Articles by McManis, B.

Article

Factors related to successful work hardening outcomes

KL Beissner, RL Saunders, and BG McManis

Ithaca College, NY 14850, USA. beissner@ithaca.edu

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify factors that predict successful work hardening outcomes. Two measures of success were used: return to work and case closure (ie, resolution of medical treatment issues). SUBJECTS: Persons with spine-related injuries who completed a work hardening program were the subjects. One hundred fifteen subjects participated in a 3-month follow-up survey, and 111 subjects participated in a 12-month follow-up survey. METHODS: Data were collected on subject characteristics, treatment history, job factors, program payer, and program factors. Subjects were contacted by telephone at 3 and 12 months after program completion to determine work status. Logit analysis was used to identify predictors of successful versus unsuccessful outcomes. RESULTS: Three months after program completion, 68% of the subjects had returned to work and 86% had successful case closure. Twelve months after program completion, 77% of the subjects had returned to work and 90% had successful case closure. The more treatment subjects received prior to entering the program, the less likely they were to be working or achieving case closure following treatment. Subjects' work status and initial time off of work were factors predicting early return to work, but not 12 months after program completion. Subjects who were working with an attorney were less likely to achieve case closure than those who were not working with an attorney. Subjects who were satisfied with the program were more likely to have achieved case closure or return to work than those who were not satisfied with the program. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: Several factors have been identified that predict successful work hardening outcomes. This information can be used to identify clients who are unlikely to benefit from work hardening.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Occup. Environ. Med.Home page
J R Anema, B Cuelenaere, A J van der Beek, D L Knol, H C W de Vet, and W van Mechelen
The effectiveness of ergonomic interventions on return-to-work after low back pain; a prospective two year cohort study in six countries on low back pain patients sicklisted for 3-4 months
Occup. Environ. Med., April 1, 2004; 61(4): 289 - 294.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the American Physical Therapy Association.