Resilience building for mood disorders: Theoretical introduction and the achievements of the Re-Work program in Japan.

Mood disorders are common, tend to recur, cause sickness absence, and lead to economic loss. Since past experiences of mood disorder episodes often increase future vulnerability, it is imperative to assist those mood disorder patients who want to resume working to build resilience to prevent relapse. Paralleling efforts in the West, a resilience-building program utilizing the principles of the Illness Management and Recovery program was first developed in Japan in 1997. The purpose of this survey is to introduce the concept and theory behind the Re-Work program and to review studies that report on program assessment, content, effects and associated factors, and prognosis of participants. A literature search performed with PubMed and Igaku chuou zasshi (Ichushi) identified 30 relevant studies. One of these reported on a tool developed to assess readiness for returning to work. Concerning program content, a group therapy setting and cognitive behavioral therapy were found to be effective. Physical exercise and relaxation techniques may be useful as secondary program components. Several studies report on program effects, but there may be factors that limit these effects. The prognosis for relapse prevention after the resumption of work may be better for Re-Work program participants than for a control group. Further research in this area is needed to confirm program effectiveness and related factors.

Re-work Program in Japan-Overview and Outcome of the Program.

Background: The objective of this study was to examine the effect of the Japanese re-work program (RP) to aid in recurrent sick leave prevention. Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort research was conducted for workers who returned to work (RTW) after sick leave due to mood disorder. Work continuation for subjects who RTW after RP participation and treatment as usual (TAU) and subjects who received TAU only were compared. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models were utilized. Additionally, propensity score matching was conducted to control for possible confounds. Results: Log-rank test of overall cohort (n = 323) showed that work continuation of RP + TAU subjects was significantly better compared to that of TAU-only subjects (p = 0.001). Multivariate analysis found a hazard rate of recurrent sick leave for TAU-only subjects of 2.121 (p = 0.001, 95% CI: 1.360-3.309). Additionally, the propensity score-matched cohort (n = 100) had similar differences (p = 0.008), with a hazard ratio of recurrent sick leave of 2.871 (p = 0.009, 95% CI: 1.302-6.331) for TAU-only subjects. Limitations: Only workers who RTW after sick leave were targeted, and no examination was made considering cases who dropped out from RP or TAU. Moreover, the sample was a non-randomized controlled trial, with propensity score matching performed. However, there was an inability to retrieve and adjust for working environment background factors after RTW. Conclusions: Work continuation of subjects with RP was observed to be significantly better, suggesting that the RP was effective for recurrent sick leave prevention.