Predictors of return to work for people on sick leave with depression, anxiety and stress: secondary analysis from a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Knowledge about predictors of return to work (RTW) in people on sick leave with common mental disorders (CMDs) may inform the development of effective vocational rehabilitation interventions for this target group. In this study, we investigated predictors of RTW at 6 and 12 months in people on sick leave with depression, anxiety disorders or stress-related disorders. METHODS: We have performed a secondary analysis, utilizing data from two RCTs that evaluated the efficacy of an integrated health care and vocational rehabilitation intervention. Data were obtained from mental health assessments, questionnaires and registers. Using Cox regression analysis, the relationship between baseline variables and RTW was analysed at 6 and 12 months after randomization within the group of CMD as a whole and within the subgroups of depression, anxiety and stress-related disorders. RESULTS: Symptom burden and employment status at baseline predicted RTW in the CMD group (n = 1245) and in the three diagnostic subgroups at both time points. RTW self-efficacy predicted RTW in the depression group but not in the anxiety or stress subgroups. CONCLUSION: Many predictors of RTW were similar over time and, to some extent, across the CMD subgroups. Findings highlight the need not only to take health-related and psychological factors into account when developing vocational rehabilitation interventions but also to consider workplace strategies and options for support.

Integrated mental healthcare and vocational rehabilitation for people on sick leave with stress-related disorders: 24-month follow-up of the randomized IBBIS trial.

OBJECTIVES: Integrating vocational rehabilitation and mental healthcare has shown effects on vocational outcomes during sick leave with common mental disorders. In a previous paper, we showed that a Danish integrated healthcare and vocational rehabilitation intervention (INT) had a surprisingly negative impact on vocational outcomes compared to service as usual (SAU) at 6- and 12-month follow-up. That was also the case with a mental healthcare intervention (MHC) tested in the same study. This article reports the 24-month follow-up results of that same study. METHOD: A randomized, parallel-group, three-arm, multi-centre superiority trial was conducted to test the effectiveness of INT and MHC compared to SAU. RESULTS: In total, 631 persons were randomized. Contrary to our hypothesis, SAU showed faster return to work than both INT [hazard rate (HR) 1.39, P=0.0027] and MHC (HR 1.30, P=0.013) at 24-month follow-up. Overall, no differences were observed regarding mental health and functional level. Compared to SAU, we observed some health benefits of MHC, but not INT, at 6-month follow-up but not thereafter, and lower rates of employment at all follow-ups. Since implementation problems might explain the results of INT, we cannot conclude that INT is no better that SAU. The MHC intervention was implemented with good fidelity and did not improve return to work. CONCLUSION: This trial does not support the hypothesis that INT lead to faster return to work. However, implementation failure may explain the negative results.