Unfit for work or alternate duties: what predicts the type of medical certificate for injured workers in Victoria, Australia

R. Ruseckaite
{"title":"Unfit for work or alternate duties: what predicts the type of medical certificate for injured workers in Victoria, Australia","authors":"R. Ruseckaite","doi":"10.1017/IDM.2014.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: General Practitioners (GPs) play an important role in worker's treatment and return-to-work (RTW). Objectives: To establish what factors potentially predict the type of medical certification that GPs provide to injured workers following work-related injury. Methods: A logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of a number of factors on the likelihood that an injured worker would receive an alternate (ALT) vs. Unfit for work (UFW) duties certificate from their GP. Compensation Research Database, containing claims and medical certification data of Victorian injured workers was accessed for the research purposes. Results: A total of 119,900 claims were included into this study. The majority of the injured workers were males, mostly age of 45–54 years. Nearly half of the workers with UFW and 36.9% with ALT certificates had musculoskeletal injuries. The regression analysis revealed that older males were less likely to receive ALT as opposed to the younger females (25–34 years old) in most occupations. Living in rural areas was associated with smaller odds of receiving ALT. We also found that seeing a GP who is more experienced with workers’ compensation increased the odds of ALT certificates. However, suffering from mental health issues decreased the odds of receiving the ALT in all workers. Discussion: To our knowledge this is the first study to describe factors predicting GP medical certification of injured workers. The results clearly indicate that workers with physical injuries, female workers, and workers visiting GPs with a higher injured worker case load in metropolitan area are more likely to receive an ALT certificate. Conclusions: The findings of this study help to identify groups of injured workers that are less likely to be recommended ALT certificates. It also suggests that certain health service providers and policy makers might require more education on the health benefits of RTW.","PeriodicalId":53532,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Disability Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Disability Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/IDM.2014.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: General Practitioners (GPs) play an important role in worker's treatment and return-to-work (RTW). Objectives: To establish what factors potentially predict the type of medical certification that GPs provide to injured workers following work-related injury. Methods: A logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of a number of factors on the likelihood that an injured worker would receive an alternate (ALT) vs. Unfit for work (UFW) duties certificate from their GP. Compensation Research Database, containing claims and medical certification data of Victorian injured workers was accessed for the research purposes. Results: A total of 119,900 claims were included into this study. The majority of the injured workers were males, mostly age of 45–54 years. Nearly half of the workers with UFW and 36.9% with ALT certificates had musculoskeletal injuries. The regression analysis revealed that older males were less likely to receive ALT as opposed to the younger females (25–34 years old) in most occupations. Living in rural areas was associated with smaller odds of receiving ALT. We also found that seeing a GP who is more experienced with workers’ compensation increased the odds of ALT certificates. However, suffering from mental health issues decreased the odds of receiving the ALT in all workers. Discussion: To our knowledge this is the first study to describe factors predicting GP medical certification of injured workers. The results clearly indicate that workers with physical injuries, female workers, and workers visiting GPs with a higher injured worker case load in metropolitan area are more likely to receive an ALT certificate. Conclusions: The findings of this study help to identify groups of injured workers that are less likely to be recommended ALT certificates. It also suggests that certain health service providers and policy makers might require more education on the health benefits of RTW.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不适合工作或替代职责:澳大利亚维多利亚州受伤工人的医疗证明类型
背景:全科医生(gp)在工人的治疗和重返工作岗位(RTW)中发挥着重要作用。目的:确定哪些因素可能预测全科医生在工伤后向受伤工人提供的医疗证明类型。方法:进行了逻辑回归分析,以评估一些因素对受伤工人从其全科医生那里获得替代(ALT)与不适合工作(UFW)职责证书的可能性的影响。为研究目的,查阅了载有维多利亚州受伤工人索赔和医疗证明数据的赔偿研究数据库。结果:本研究共纳入119,900例索赔。大多数受伤工人是男性,年龄大多在45-54岁之间。近一半拥有UFW的工人和36.9%拥有ALT证书的工人有肌肉骨骼损伤。回归分析显示,在大多数职业中,与年轻女性(25-34岁)相比,年龄较大的男性接受ALT的可能性较小。生活在农村地区接受ALT的几率较小。我们还发现,看一个在工人赔偿方面更有经验的全科医生会增加获得ALT证书的几率。然而,患有精神健康问题的工人接受ALT的几率降低了。讨论:据我们所知,这是第一个描述预测受伤工人GP医疗认证的因素的研究。结果清楚地表明,有身体伤害的工人、女性工人和在首都地区就诊的工人工伤病例量较高的全科医生更容易获得ALT证书。结论:本研究的发现有助于识别不太可能被推荐ALT证书的受伤工人群体。它还表明,某些卫生服务提供者和政策制定者可能需要更多关于RTW健康益处的教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Disability Management
International Journal of Disability Management Social Sciences-Health (social science)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Voraussetzungen für eine erfolgreiche Implementierung Vorteile eines gelingenden DisAbility-Managements Interrelated Factors for Return to Work of Sick-Listed Employees in Sweden Disclosing a Diagnosis in the Workplace: Perspective of People With Multiple Sclerosis Mögliche Widerstände
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1