Measuring work disability: what can administrative data tell us about patient outcomes?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the association between administrative measures of work disability and self-reported work, pain, and functional status. METHODS: We conducted baseline and follow-up interviews to assess pain, functional status, work status, and demographic factors in workers with low back injuries, carpal tunnel syndrome, and upper and lower extremity fractures. Administrative measures of work disability were obtained from the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. RESULTS: Pain intensity and impairment levels were lowest in those who had not received any disability payments, somewhat higher for those who were no longer receiving time loss benefits, and highest for workers receiving time loss payments at the time of interview. CONCLUSIONS: Administrative measures of work disability are significantly associated with self-reported outcomes and can be an efficient tool for tracking and evaluating outcomes of medical treatments, surgical procedures, and occupational health programs.

Early predictors of chronic work disability associated with carpal tunnel syndrome: a longitudinal workers' compensation cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The study objectives were to identify early predictors of chronic work disability associated with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and to test the hypothesis that variables from each of several domains (sociodemographic, clinical, work-related, and psychosocial) would add unique predictive information. METHODS: Washington State workers were interviewed 18 days (median) after submitting a new workers' compensation claim for CTS. Baseline predictors of chronic work disability (> or =180 days of work disability compensation in the year after claim submission) were examined for workers who had at least 1 day of disability compensation (N = 899). RESULTS: Baseline demographic variables, symptom severity, functional limitations, lack of job accommodation, job physical demands, job psychosocial conditions, and worker psychosocial characteristics predicted chronic disability bivariately. Each domain of variables added significantly to the prediction of chronic disability. The final multivariable model had fair ability to discriminate individuals with versus without chronic disability (cross-validated area under the ROC curve = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic, clinical, work-related, and worker psychosocial factors early in a claim contribute unique information to the prediction of subsequent work disability associated with CTS.

Worker recovery expectations and fear-avoidance predict work disability in a population-based workers' compensation back pain sample.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, population-based cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether worker demographic, pain, disability, and psychosocial variables, assessed soon after work-related back pain disability onset, predict 6-month work disability. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Greater age, pain, and physical disability, and certain psychosocial characteristics may be risk factors for prolonged back pain-related work disability, although many studies have been small, findings have been inconsistent, and some psychosocial variables have not been examined prospectively. METHODS: Workers (N = 1,068) completed telephone interviews assessing demographic, pain, disability, and psychosocial variables 18 days (median) after submitting Workers' Compensation back pain disability claims. Administrative measures of work disability 6 months after claim submission were obtained. RESULTS: At 6 months, 196 workers (18.4%) were receiving work disability compensation. Age, race, education, and baseline pain and disability were significant predictors of 6-month disability. Adjusting for baseline demographics, pain, disability, and other psychosocial variables, high work fear-avoidance (odds ratio, 4.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-13.7) and very low recovery expectations (odds ratio, 3.1, 95% confidence interval, 1.5-6.5) were significant independent predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with acute work-related back pain, high pain and disability, low recovery expectations, and fears that work may increase pain or cause harm are risk factors for chronic work disability.

Multidisciplinary pain center outcomes in Washington State Workers' Compensation.

We conducted this study to evaluate the clinical and disability status of injured workers 4.6 years after undergoing multidisciplinary pain center evaluation, comparing subjects who received treatment to subjects who were evaluated only. Three hundred injured workers were selected for a telephone survey; 150 had received pain center treatment and 150 had been evaluated but not treated. The survey included the SF-12, and questions about subjects' pain intensity and current work status. A workers' compensation database indicated the disability status of subjects. The response rate was 50%. In multivariate analyses, treated and evaluated-only subjects did not differ significantly in disability status, pain intensity, SF-12 scores, or current work status. At 4.6 years follow up, there was no evidence that pain center treatment affects either disability status or clinical status of injured workers.

Comparison of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and generic health status measures: a population-based study of workers' compensation back injury claimants.

STUDY DESIGN: Workers' compensation back injury claimants completed baseline and follow-up telephone interviews in a prospective population-based cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) to widely used generic health status measures in a sample of workers with recent work-related back injuries in terms of validity, reliability, responsiveness to change, and floor and ceiling effects. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Little research has directly compared the validity and responsiveness of the RDQ to that of the Short-Form 12 or Short-Form 36 health status measures among individuals with back pain. Furthermore, there is little information concerning the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the RDQ as a measure of functional outcomes for workers with back injuries. METHODS: Approximately 8 weeks (median) after filing low back injury claims, 309 workers completed the RDQ, Short-Form 12, and Short-Form 36 scales and gave information about their work status in computer-assisted telephone interviews. An average of 5 months later, 284 workers (91.9%) completed the measures again. RESULTS: The RDQ demonstrated excellent internal consistency and validity through correlations with other measures of physical functioning, ability to discriminate between those working and those not working, and much more responsiveness to change than the Short-Form 12 and Short-Form 36 scales. However, 15% of the sample did not answer one or more RDQ items. CONCLUSIONS: The RDQ is a valid measure of physical disability among workers with back injuries. Its greater responsiveness to change suggests its superiority to the Short-Form 12 and Short-Form 36 as an outcome measure in this population.