The Work Experience Survey - Rheumatic conditions (United Kingdom): Psychometric properties and identifying the workplace barriers of employed people with inflammatory arthritis receiving vocational rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: The aims were to: revise the Work Experience Survey-Rheumatic Conditions (WES-RC- UK), a work assessment listing 142 workplace barriers; investigate content validity, reliability, and concurrent validity; update the accompanying WES-RC and WORKWELL Solutions Manuals; and investigate workplace barriers of people with inflammatory arthritis. METHODS: Rheumatology therapists, following vocational rehabilitation (VR) training, assessed participants in the WORKWELL VR trial using the WES-RC. Data were extracted from the WES-RC to identify the frequency of workplace barriers, and from trial baseline questionnaires (e.g., Work Limitations Questionnaire-25 (WLQ-25). Barriers reported by ≤5 participants were considered for removal. WES-RC content validity was assessed by linking to the International Classification of Functioning, Health, and Disability Core Set for VR (ICF-VR). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α and concurrent validity by correlating the total number of workplace barriers reported with WLQ-25 scores. RESULTS: WES-RCs were completed with 116 employed participants: 79% women, age 48.72 (SD 9.49) years, and 57% working full-time. The WES-RC was reduced to 121 barriers. Content validity was good, with 73/90 ICF-VR items linked. Cronbach's α = 0.92, that is, suitable for individual use. Concurrent validity was moderate: WLQ-25 (rs  = 0.40). The three most common barriers were Physical Job Demands (100%: e.g., mobility 99%; hand use 74%), Mental, Time, Energy, Emotional Job Demands (91%, e.g., concentration 47%, remembering 41%); Getting Ready for and Travel to Work (87%, e.g., driving 60%). CONCLUSION: The WES-RC (UK) has good content validity, reliability, and concurrent validity. The wide range of barriers emphasises the need for biopsychosocial work rehabilitation.

Psychometric testing of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Work Instability Scale in employed people with fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to establish whether the Rheumatoid Arthritis Work Instability Scale (RA-WIS), in its current form, is applicable for use with employed people with fibromyalgia (FM) to identify the risk of work disability and need for work rehabilitation. METHODS: Content validity was first investigated using cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed a postal questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the RA-WIS and work (e.g., Workplace Activity Limitations Scale) and health (FM Impact Questionnaire-Revised (FIQ-R) scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 13 participants with FM. All RA-WIS items were considered very or extremely relevant by almost all participants, with only one suggesting other items (anxiety and brain fog). Questionnaire responses were analysed from 156 employed participants: 94% women; 45.71 (SD 10.05) years of age; with time since FM diagnosis 2.99 (4.17) years (symptom duration 8.36 (SD 7.16) years). The RA-WIS mostly satisfied Rasch model requirements and a Rasch transformation scale was created. Concurrent validity was generally good (rs = 0.55-0.66) with work scales and the FIQ-R. Internal consistency (Person Separation Index values) was consistent with group use in FM, not individual level use. Test-retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass coefficient (2, 1) = 0.90. DISCUSSION: The RA-WIS is valid and reliable for group use in employed people with FM. However, further work is needed to develop a WIS for individual use in FM.

Psychometric testing of the British-English Perceived Workplace Support Scale, Work Accommodations, Benefits, Policies and Practices Scale, and Work Transitions Index in four rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions.

OBJECTIVE: The aims were to validate linguistically British-English versions of the Perceived Workplace Support Scale (PWSS), Work Accommodations, Benefits, Policies and Practices Scale (WABPPS), and Work Transitions Index (WTI) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), osteoarthritis (OA) and fibromyalgia (FM). METHODS: The three scales were adapted into British-English and reviewed by an expert panel prior to cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed postal questionnaires. Construct validity for the PWSS was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the three scales and work, job strain and work-life balance scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 831 employed participants: 68% women, 53.50 (SD 8.9) years of age, with condition duration 7.70 (SD 8.00) years. The PWSS satisfied Rasch model requirements. Concurrent validity was mostly as hypothesised, that is, weak to moderate negative correlations for the PWSS (rs  = 0.07 to -0.61), and weak to moderate positive correlations for the WABPPS and WTI (rs  = 0.20-0.52). Some correlations were stronger, mostly in axSpA. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) for all three scales was consistent with group use in all conditions. Test-retest reliability was generally excellent, with intraclass coefficients (2,1) of 0.80-0.93 for the three scales in the four conditions. DISCUSSION: Reliable, valid versions of the British-English PWSS, WABPPS, and WTI are now available for use in research, organisational level studies and vocational rehabilitation.

Biopsychosocial, work-related, and environmental factors affecting work participation in people with Osteoarthritis: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Osteoarthritis (OA) causes pain and disability, with onset often during working age. Joint pain is associated with functional difficulties and may lead to work instability. The aims of this systematic review are to identify: the impact of OA on work participation; and biopsychosocial and work-related factors associated with absenteeism, presenteeism, work transitions, work impairment, work accommodations, and premature work loss. METHODS: Four databases were searched, including Medline. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools were used for quality assessment, with narrative synthesis to pool findings due to heterogeneity of study designs and work outcomes. RESULTS: Nineteen studies met quality criteria (eight cohort; 11 cross-sectional): nine included OA of any joint(s), five knee-only, four knee and/or hip, and one knee, hip, and hand OA. All were conducted in high income countries. Absenteeism due to OA was low. Presenteeism rates were four times greater than absenteeism. Performing physically intensive work was associated with absenteeism, presenteeism, and premature work loss due to OA. Moderate-to-severe joint pain and pain interference were associated with presenteeism, work transition, and premature work loss. A smaller number of studies found that comorbidities were associated with absenteeism and work transitions. Two studies reported low co-worker support was associated with work transitions and premature work loss. CONCLUSIONS: Physically intensive work, moderate-to-severe joint pain, co-morbidities, and low co-worker support potentially affects work participation in OA. Further research, using longitudinal study designs and examining the links between OA and biopsychosocial factors e.g., workplace accommodations, is needed to identify targets for interventions. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019133343 .

Psychometric testing of the British-English Long-Term Conditions Job Strain Scale, Long-Term Conditions Work Spillover Scale and Work-Health-Personal Life Perceptions Scale in four rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions.

OBJECTIVE: The aims were to validate linguistically British-English versions of the Long-Term Conditions Job Strain Scale (LTCJSS), Long-Term Conditions Work Spillover Scale (LTCWSS) and Work-Health-Personal Life Perceptions Scale (WHPLPS) in rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia (FM). METHODS: The three scales were forward translated and reviewed by an expert panel prior to cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed a postal questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the three scales and work (e.g., Workplace Activity Limitations Scale [WALS]) and condition-specific health scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 831 employed participants: 68% women, 53.5 (SD 8.9) years of age, with condition duration 7.7 (SD 8.0) years. The LTCJSS, LTCWSS and WHPLPS Parts 1 and 2 satisfied Rasch model requirements, but Part 3 did not. A Rasch transformation scale and Reference Metric equating scales with the WALS were created. Concurrent validity was generally good (rs = 0.41-0.85) for the three scales, except the WHPLPS Part 3. Internal consistency (Person Separation Index values) was consistent with group use in all conditions, and individual use except for the LTCWSS and WHPLSP Parts 1 and 2 in FM. Test-retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass coefficients (2,1) of 0.80-0.96 for the three scales in the four conditions. DISCUSSION: Reliable, valid versions of the British-English LTCJSS, LTCWSS and WHPLPS Parts 1 and 2 are now available for use in the UK.

Psychometric testing of the British English Workplace Activity Limitations Scale in four rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions.

Objectives: The aims were to validate a British English version of the Workplace Activity Limitations Scale (WALS) linguistically, then test this psychometrically in RA, axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), OA and FM. Methods: The WALS was forward translated, reviewed by an expert panel, and cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted. Participants completed a postal questionnaire booklet. Construct (structural) validity was examined by fit to the Rasch measurement model. Concurrent validity included testing between the WALS and the Work Limitations Questionnaire-25 (WLQ-25). Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire booklet for test-retest reliability. Results: Minor wording changes were made to the WALS, then 831 employed participants completed questionnaires: 267 men and 564 women; 53.5 (s.d. 8.9) years of age; with condition duration 7.7 (s.d. 8.0) years. The WALS satisfied Rasch model requirements, and a WALS Rasch transformation table was created. Concurrent validity was strong with the WLQ-25 (RA r s = 0.78; axSpA r s = 0.83; OA r s = 0.63; FM r s = 0.64). Internal consistency was consistent with group use (α = 0.80-0.87). Test-retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1) at ≥0.90. Conclusion: A reliable, valid British English version of the WALS is now available for use in the UK.

Work limitations and associated factors in rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia.

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) impact on work participation. The aims of this study were to: examine work limitations of working people with: rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), osteoarthritis, or fibromyalgia using the Workplace Activity Limitations Scale (WALS, a measure of presenteeism); and identify personal, functioning and disability, and work contextual factors associated with presenteeism. METHODS: Secondary analysis was conducted of a cross-sectional survey including work outcome measures (WORK-PROM study). A literature review identified variables (coded to ICF) to include in multivariable regressions examining factors associated with presenteeism. RESULTS: Moderate to high WALS scores were identified in: 93.60% with FM; 69.90% OA; 65.20% RA; and 46.80% axSpA (n = 822). Similarities in work limitations were noted across conditions, although some more problematic in specific RMD. Participants received help with about a quarter of activities (27%RA; 25%FM; 23%OA; 17%axSpA) and work adaptations for less than a fifth causing difficulty (18%FM; 14%RA; 14%OA; 9%axSpA). Literature review identified 33 variables in the WORK-PROM dataset to include in multivariable regressions. Factors associated with higher WALS scores were worse: functional limitations, job strain, pain, difficulties with mental-interpersonal job demands, perceived health status, work-life balance, greater need for work accommodations and lack of perceived work support. DISCUSSION: This study extends understanding of work limitations of working people with these four RMD, the extent of help and adaptations received, need for more work accommodation support, and focus on work support, work rehabilitation, and healthy workplace practices to help keep people working.

Exploring the perceptions of how living with osteoarthritis affects employed people's work productivity.

BACKGROUND: Working people with osteoarthritis (OA) can experience difficulties at work due to pain and activity limitation. OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of biopsychosocial factors on work participation in employed people with OA. METHODS: An explorative, qualitative, semi-structured one-to-one telephone interview study. Employed people living with OA were recruited through an arthritis volunteer database and social media. Data was analysed using Thematic Analysis. FINDINGS: Participants (n = 15) included people with OA in any joints from mixture of careers. Themes were: (1) Effects of OA on work participation, (2) Impact of workplace support and accommodations on employment, and (3) Importance of clinical support and management. CONCLUSION: Impact of OA on people's work productivity results in a spill over into their home lives. Work transitions and adaptations are not always available. Employers need to be educated to support employees to create a positive work environment and promote available workplace support.

Job retention vocational rehabilitation for employed people with inflammatory arthritis: adaptations to the WORKWELL trial due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

There are high levels of work disability, absenteeism (sick leave) and presenteeism (reduced productivity) amongst people with inflammatory arthritis. WORKWELL is a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial of job retention vocational rehabilitation for employed people with inflammatory arthritis. The trial tested the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the WORKWELL programme compared to the receipt of written self-help information only. Both arms continued to receive usual care. In March 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the WORKWELL trial paused to recruitment and intervention delivery. To successfully re-start, protocol amendments were rapidly submitted and changes to existing trial procedures were made. The WORKWELL protocol was adapted in response to both the practical issues likely faced by many clinical research studies active across NHS sites during the pandemic and additional trial-specific challenges. A key eligibility criterion for the trial required participants to be in paid work for at least 15 h per week. However, UK national lockdowns led to a substantial proportion of the workforce suddenly being furloughed or unable to work, and many people with arthritis taking immunosuppressive medications were asked to shield themselves. Thus, the number of eligible participants was reduced. Those continuing to work were harder to identify, as hospital clinics moved to remote delivery, and also to then screen, consent and treat, as the hospital research staff and clinical therapists were re-deployed. New recruitment and consent strategies were applied, and where sites had reduced capacity, responsibilities were absorbed by the trial management team. Remote intervention delivery and electronic data capture were also implemented. By rapidly adapting the WORKWELL protocol and procedures, the trial successfully reopened to recruitment in July 2020, only 4 months after the trial pause. We were able to achieve recruitment figures above the pre-COVID target and maintain a high retention rate. In addition, we found many of the protocol changes beneficial, as these streamlined trial procedures, thus improving efficiency. It is likely that many strategies implemented in response to the pandemic may become standard practice in future research within trials of a similar design and methodology.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03942783 . Retrospectively registered on 08 May 2019. ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN61762297 . Retrospectively registered on 13 May 2019.

The Workwell trial: protocol for the process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial of job retention vocational rehabilitation for employed people with inflammatory arthritis.

BACKGROUND: The Workwell trial is a multi-centre randomised controlled trial with the aims of evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of job retention vocational rehabilitation for employed people with inflammatory arthritis, who are experiencing work difficulties due to their arthritis. Vocational rehabilitation is delivered by health service occupational therapists, who have received additional training in providing this Workwell intervention. A process evaluation will be undertaken alongside the main trial to investigate implementation fidelity; understand key stakeholders' perspectives of the intervention and the social and structural context in which the intervention is provided; and explore issues related to future implementation in clinical practice. This protocol describes the aims, objectives, and methodology of the Workwell trial process evaluation. METHODS: This mixed methods process evaluation will follow the Medical Research Council's Guidance on process evaluations for complex interventions. It will be underpinned by the conceptual framework for implementation fidelity (CFIF) and normalisation process theory (NPT). We will analyse treatment records, work assessments, and treatment notes to ascertain implementation fidelity. Semi-structured interviews with trial participants, their employer/line managers, treating therapists, and their therapy service managers will be undertaken to explore perceptions of the intervention, contextual factors, and potential for future implementation in practice. Interview topic guides will be informed by NPT. Therapists' views about Workwell training will be explored via questionnaires following training, and interviews and focus groups following treatment delivery to inform future implementation. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively. Qualitative data will be analysed using thematic analysis. NPT will guide data analysis and interpretation. Findings from the different elements of this embedded design process evaluation will be reported separately and then the elements integrated. The process evaluation data will be analysed independently of the Workwell trial outcome evaluation. The process evaluation data will then be reviewed in the light of the trial findings. DISCUSSION: Few trials of job retention vocational rehabilitation in arthritis have included process evaluations. This process evaluation will assist in understanding factors influencing trial outcomes and identifying potential contextual barriers and facilitators for the potential implementation of Workwell vocational rehabilitation into clinical services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03942783 . Registered on 08 May 2019. ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN61762297 . Registered on 13 May 2019. Retrospectively registered.

Incidence and risk factors for poor ankle functional recovery, and the development and progression of posttraumatic ankle osteoarthritis after significant ankle ligament injury (SALI): the SALI cohort study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Ankle sprains are one of the most common musculoskeletal injuries, accounting for up to 5% of all Emergency Department visits in the United Kingdom. Ankle injury may be associated with future ankle osteoarthritis. Up to 70% of ankle osteoarthritis cases may be associated with previous ankle injury. There is limited research regarding the association between ankle sprain and ankle osteoarthritis development. The current study aims to phenotype those who suffer significant ankle ligament injuries, identify potential risk factors for ankle injuries and subsequent poor recovery, examine why individuals may develop osteoarthritis, and what factors influence this chance. METHODS: In this multicentre cohort study participants were recruited from nine Emergency Departments and two Urgent Care Centres in the United Kingdom. Participants (aged 18-70 years old) were defined as those who had suffered an isolated acute ankle sprain, which was Ottawa Ankle Rules positive, but negative for a significant ankle fracture on x-ray. Age and sex matched controls were also recruited. The controls were individuals who had not suffered a significant ankle injury, including ankle pain, function affected for more than 7 days, or the ankle caused them to report to an Emergency Department. Data is collected through a series of seven questionnaires (at baseline, 3 months, 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, 10 years, and 15 years later). The questionnaires include four sections (demographic questions; index injury, and injury history questions; functional assessment questions; and quality of life questions) and are designed to collect detailed information about the individual, their injury, potential risk factors for ankle sprains and ankle osteoarthritis, plus their medical history and any medication consumed. DISCUSSION: The Significant Ankle Ligament Injury (SALI) study aims to add to the limited knowledge regarding which factors can predict ankle sprains, complaints, and osteoarthritis. This is important because despite ankle sprains being regarded as a benign injury that resolves quickly, residual symptoms are not uncommon months and years after the injury.

The effect on work presenteeism of job retention vocational rehabilitation compared to a written self-help work advice pack for employed people with inflammatory arthritis: protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial (the WORKWELL trial).

BACKGROUND: Work problems are common in people with inflammatory arthritis. Up to 50% stop work within 10 years due to their condition and up to 67% report presenteeism (i.e. reduced work productivity), even amongst those with low disease activity. Job retention vocational rehabilitation (JRVR) may help prevent or postpone job loss and reduce presenteeism through work assessment, work-related rehabilitation and enabling job accommodations. This aims to create a better match between the person's abilities and their job demands. The objectives of the Workwell trial are to test the overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of JRVR (WORKWELL) provided by additionally trained National Health Service (NHS) occupational therapists compared to a control group who receive self-help information both in addition to usual care. METHODS: Based on the learning from a feasibility trial (the WORK-IA trial: ISRCTN76777720 ), the WORKWELL trial is a multi-centre, pragmatic, individually-randomised parallel group superiority trial, including economic evaluation, contextual factors analysis and process evaluation. Two hundred forty employed adults with rheumatoid arthritis, undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis or psoriatic arthritis (in secondary care), aged 18 years or older with work instability will be randomised to one of two groups: a self-help written work advice pack plus usual care (control intervention); or WORKWELL JRVR plus a self-help written work advice pack and usual care. WORKWELL will be delivered by occupational therapists provided with additional JRVR training from the research team. The primary outcome is presenteeism as measured using the Work Limitations Questionnaire-25. A comprehensive range of secondary outcomes of work, health, contextual factors and health resource use are included. Outcomes are measured at 6- and 12- months (with 12-months as the primary end-point). A multi-perspective within-trial cost-effectiveness analyses will also be conducted. DISCUSSION: This trial will contribute to the evidence base for provision of JRVR to people with inflammatory arthritis. If JRVR is found to be effective in enabling people to keep working, the findings will support decision-making about provision of JRVR by rheumatology teams, therapy services and healthcare commissioners, and providing evidence of the effectiveness of JRVR and the economic impact of its implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.Gov: NCT03942783 . Registered 08/05/2019 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03942783 ); ISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN61762297 . Registered:13/05/2019 ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN61762297 ). Retrospectively registered.

Ultrasound-guided measurement of skin and subcutaneous tissue thickness in children with diabetes and recommendations for giving insulin injections.

AIM: To measure skin thickness (ST) and skin + subcutaneous layer thickness (SCT) by ultrasound and estimate the risk of intramuscular injection (IM) with different needle lengths across injection sites according to age group. METHOD: Children recruited between 1 and 18 years with type 1 and 2 diabetes on insulin injections and divided into three age groups: 1-6 years, 7-12 years and 13-18 years. A portable ultrasound was used to measure ST and SCT at four injection sites on the abdomen, arm, thigh and buttock. RESULTS: Total 153 children enrolled for the study. The mean (SD) measurement of ST & SCT at four sites on abdomen, arm, thigh & buttocks were as follows; 4.33 mm (±2.22), 5.55 mm (±2.26), 5.83 mm (±3.12), 6.48 mm (±3.47) in 1-6 years old; 7.11 mm (±3.68), 7.79 mm (±4.54), 7.17 mm (±3.62), 8.51 mm (±3.65) in 7-12 years old; 8.94 mm (±4.50), 8.42 mm (±5.00), 8.61 mm (±4.76), 9.76 mm (±4.38) in 13-18 years old. Young children, 1-6 years have the highest risk of IM injection with all needle lengths, i.e. 4, 5, 6, 8 & 12.7 mm, while older children 7-12 & 13-18 years have a lower risk with shorter needles (4, 5 and 6 mm) as compared to longer needles (8 and 12.7 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Children with diabetes on insulin therapy should be advised on the appropriate needle length accordingly to their age and BMI.

Ventriculoperitoneal shunt survival in children who require additional abdominal surgery--are our estimations of the additional risk accurate?

OBJECTIVE: Ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS)-dependent children require abdominal surgery for many reasons. Our objective was to quantify the risk of abdominal surgery on VPS survival and to determine whether timing of abdominal intervention impacts on shunt outcome. METHODS: Retrospective data collection was performed on all children undergoing primary VPS insertion or revision over 2 years (1/1/08-31/12/10). All shunt interventions were categorised into two groups: those undergoing additional "Abdominal surgery" (AS) versus those undergoing "Shunt-only" (SO). Kaplan-Meier survival curves were devised and analysed using log-rank. In the AS group, we compared shunt survival for shunts inserted at various "Time from abdominal surgery" (TAS). We conducted a control analysis to compare shunt survival in AS, SO and a control "clean general surgery" (SG) group. Chi-squared test was used to determine the cause of shunt failure in these three groups. RESULTS: Three hundred and forty two shunts from 109 patients were included. Twenty patients contributed 118 shunts to the AS group. Median shunt survival was 3.68 months (95% CI = 1.01-6.47) and 22.6 months (95% CI = 8.76-36.4) in the AS and SO groups, respectively (log-rank = 16.6, p < 0.001). For each additional abdominal intervention, the risk of shunt failure increased by 55.4% (p < 0.001). Median shunt survival was 1.48 months (95% CI = 0.00-3.09, p < 0.001), if shunt insertion occurred within 1 year of abdominal surgery. Beyond 1 year, median shunt survival increased five-fold to 7.65 months (95% CI = 0.00-20.1, log-rank = 23.2, p < 0.001). There was a 29% reduction in risk of shunt failure per year interval between a shunt and an abdominal surgery (95% CI = 0.11-0.44, p < 0.005). Our control analysis confirmed that shunts in the AS group had worst survival and infection (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Additional abdominal surgery shortens VPS lifetime and increases risk of infection. Delaying abdominal surgery from a shunt intervention or vice versa by at least 1 year may prolong shunt survival.