Workplace Violence Prevention: Flagging Practices and Challenges in Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Flagging is a standardized way to communicate the risk of patient violence to workers. We add to the limited body of research on flagging by describing hospitals' approaches to and challenges with flagging patients with a history of violent behavior. METHODS: We used a qualitative case study approach of hospitals in Ontario, Canada and their patient flagging practices. Key informants and our advisory committee identified 11 hospitals to invite to participate. Hospitals assisted in recruiting frontline clinical and allied health workers and managers to an interview or focus group. A document analysis of hospitals' flagging policies and related documents was conducted. Thematic analysis was used to analyze interview and focus group data. FINDINGS: Five hospitals participated. Of the five hospitals, four had a flagging policy where frontline clinical workers (n = 58), frontline allied health workers (n = 31), and managers (n = 42) participated in an interview (n = 43) or focus group (n = 15). Participants described three challenges: patient stigmatization, patient privacy, and gaps in policy and procedures. CONCLUSION/APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: Flagging patients with a history of violent behavior is one intervention that hospitals use to keep workers safe. While violence prevention was important to study participants, a number of factors can affect implementation of a flagging policy. Study findings suggest that hospital leadership should mitigate patient stigmatization (real and perceived) and perception of patient rights infringement by educating all managers and frontline workers on the purpose of flagging and the relationship between occupational health and safety and privacy regulations. Leadership should also actively involve frontline workers who are the most knowledgeable about how policies work in practice.

Tool for the Meaningful Consideration of Language Barriers in Qualitative Health Research.

Individuals who experience language barriers are largely excluded as participants from health research, resulting in gaps in knowledge that have implications for the development of equitable policies, tools, and strategies. Drawing on the existing literature and on their collective experience conducting occupational health research in contexts of language barriers, the authors propose a tool to assist qualitative researchers and representatives from funding agencies and ethics review boards with the meaningful consideration of language barriers in research. There remain gaps and debates with respect to the relevant ethical and methodological guidance set forth by funding agencies and institutions and proposed in the scientific literature. This article adds to knowledge in this area by contributing our experiences, observations, and recommendations, including around the issue of conducting research in contexts of more or less linguistic diversity.

Do Health Service Use and Return-to-Work Outcomes Differ with GPs' Injured-Worker Caseload?

Purpose To determine whether healthcare use and return-to-work (RTW) outcomes differ with GPs' injured-worker caseload. Methods Retrospective analyses of the Compensation Research Database, which captures approximately 85% of all injured worker claims in Victoria, Australia was conducted. Four injured-worker caseload groups were examined that represented the 25th, 50th, 75th, and 100th percentiles of claimants seen per GP over the 8-year study period (2003-2010): (i) 1-13 claimants; (ii) 14-26 claimants; (iii) 27-48 claimants; and (iv) 49+ claimants (total claims, n = 124,342; total GPs, n = 9748).The characteristics of claimants in each caseload group, as well as the influence of caseload on three outcomes relevant to RTW (weekly compensation paid, work incapacity days, medical-and-like costs), were examined. Results Distinct profiles for high versus low caseload groups emerged. High caseload GPs treated significantly more men in blue collar occupations and issued significantly more 'alternate duties' certificates. Conversely, low caseload GPs treated significantly more women in white collar occupations, predominantly for mental health injuries, and issued significantly more 'unfit-for-work' certificates. Few significant differences were found between the two intermediate GP caseload groups. High caseload was associated with significantly greater medical-and-like costs, however, no caseload group differences were detected for weekly compensation paid or duration of time-off-work. Conclusions Training GPs who have a low injured-worker caseload in workers' compensation processes, utilising high caseload GPs in initiatives involving peer-to-peer support, or system changes where employers are encouraged to provide preventive or rehabilitative support in the workplace may improve RTW outcomes for injured workers.

Recovery Within Injury Compensation Schemes: A System Mapping Study.

Purpose Many industrialised nations have systems of injury compensation and rehabilitation that are designed to support injury recovery and return to work. Despite their intention, there is now substantial evidence that injured people, employers and healthcare providers can experience those systems as difficult to navigate, and that this can affect injury recovery. This study sought to characterise the relationships and interactions occurring between actors in three Australian injury compensation systems, to identify the range of factors that impact on injury recovery, and the interactions and inter-relationships between these factors. Methods This study uses data collected directly from injured workers and their family members via qualitative interviews, analysed for major themes and interactions between themes, and then mapped to a system level model. Results Multiple factors across multiple system levels were reported by participants as influencing injury recovery. Factors at the level of the injured person's immediate environment, the organisations and personnel involved in rehabilitation and compensation processes were more commonly cited than governmental or societal factors as influencing physical function, psychological function and work participation. Conclusions The study demonstrates that injury recovery is a complex process influenced by the decisions and actions of organisations and individuals operating across multiple levels of the compensation system. Changes occurring 'upstream', for instance at the level of governmental or organisational policy, can impact injury recovery through both direct and diffuse pathways.

Communication and collaboration among return-to-work stakeholders.

Purpose: Workers who are injured or become ill on the job are best able to return-to-work when stakeholders involved in their case collaborate and communicate. This study examined health care providers' and case managers' engagement in rehabilitation and return-to-work following workplace injury or illness. Method: In-depth interviews were conducted with 97 health care providers and 34 case managers in four Canadian provinces about their experiences facilitating rehabilitation and return-to-work, and interacting with system stakeholders. Results: A qualitative thematic content analysis demonstrated two key findings. Firstly, stakeholders were challenged to collaborate as a result of: barriers to interdisciplinary and cross-professional communication; philosophical differences about the timing and appropriateness of return-to-work; and confusion among health care providers about the workers' compensation system. Secondly, these challenges adversely affected the co-ordination of patient care, and consequentially, injured workers often became information conduits, and effective and timely treatment and return-to-work was sometimes negatively impacted. Conclusions: Communication challenges between health care providers and case managers may negatively impact patient care and alienate treating health care providers. Discussion about role clarification, the appropriateness of early return-to-work, how paperwork shapes health care providers' role expectations, and strengthened inter-professional communication are considered. Implications for Rehabilitation Administrative and conceptual barriers in workers' compensation systems challenge collaboration and communication between health care providers and case managers. Injured workers may become conduits of incorrect information, resulting in adversarial relationships, overturned health care providers' recommendations, and their disengagement from rehabilitation and return-to-work. Stakeholders should clarify the role of health care providers during rehabilitation and return-to-work and the appropriateness of early return-to-work to mitigate recurring challenges. Communication procedures between health care specialists may disrupt these challenges, increasing the likelihood of timely and effective rehabilitation and return-to-work.

Perceived Role and Expectations of Health Care Providers in Return to Work.

Purpose Health care providers (HCPs) play an important role in return to work (RTW) and in the workers' compensation system. However, HCPs may feel unsure about their responsibilities in the RTW process and experience difficulty making recommendations about RTW readiness and limitations. This study examines the ways in which HCPs and case managers (CMs) perceive HCPs role in the RTW process, and how similarities and differences between these views, in turn, inform expectations of HCPs. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted with 69 HCPs and 34 CMs from 4 provinces. Data were double coded and a thematic, inductive analysis was carried out to develop key themes. Findings The main role of HCPs was to diagnose injury and provide patients with appropriate treatment. In addition, the majority of HCPs and CMs viewed providing medical information to workers' compensation board (WCB) and the general encouragement of RTW as important roles played by HCPs. There was less clarity, and at times disagreement, about the scope of HCPs' role in providing medical information to WCB and encouraging RTW, such as the type of information they should provide and the timelines for RTW. Conclusion Interviews suggest that different role expectations may stem from differing perspectives of HCPs and the CMs had regarding RTW. A comprehensive discussion between WCB decision-makers and HCPs is needed, with an end goal of reaching consensus regarding roles and responsibilities in the RTW process. The findings highlight the importance of establishing clearer role expectations.

Occupational Health and Safety Vulnerability of Recent Immigrants and Refugees.

Recent immigrants and refugees have higher rates of work-related injuries and illnesses compared to Canadian-born workers. As a result, they are often labelled as vulnerable workers. This study explored the factors that contribute to occupational health and safety (OHS) vulnerability of recent immigrants and refugees with a focus on modifiable factors such as exposure to hazards and access to workplace protections, awareness of OHS and worker rights, and empowerment to act on those rights. Eighteen focus groups were conducted with 110 recent immigrants and refugees about their experiences looking for work and in their first jobs in Canada. A thematic content analysis was used to organize the data and to identify and report themes. The jobs described by participants typically involved poor working conditions and exposure to hazards without adequate workplace protections. Most participants had limited knowledge of OHS and employment rights and tended to not voice safety concerns to employers. Understanding OHS vulnerability from the lens of workplace context can help identify modifiable conditions that affect the risk of injury and illness among recent immigrants and refugees. Safe work integration depends on providing these workers with information about their rights, adequate job training, and opportunities for participating in injury prevention.

The occupational health and safety vulnerability of recent immigrants accessing settlement services.

OBJECTIVE: To compare occupational health and safety (OHS) vulnerability of recent Canadian immigrants and workers born in Canada. METHODS: Recent immigrants (n = 195) were recruited at four settlement agencies in Southern Ontario, and non-immigrants in Ontario (n = 1030) were contacted by phone and email by a third-party survey provider. The questionnaire measured OHS vulnerability using a 27-item measure and collected sociodemographic and workplace information. Responses were used to evaluate one overall and three specific (policy and procedure, awareness, and empowerment) measures of OHS vulnerability. Log-binomial models compared the overall and policy and procedure-, awareness- and empowerment-related vulnerability of recent immigrants to non-immigrant workers. Models were adjusted for demographic and workplace characteristics. RESULTS: New immigrants experience statistically elevated levels of overall (adjusted risk ratio [ARR] = 1.60, 95% CI 1.23-2.07) and empowerment-related vulnerability (ARR = 1.54, 95% CI 1.09-2.17). Compared to workers born in Canada, immigrants also report elevated levels of policy and procedure vulnerability (ARR = 1.37, 95% CI 0.98-1.92), although this estimate did not meet traditional criteria for statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: This study uses a novel multi-dimensional measure to identify how differences in workplace context place recent immigrant workers at increased risk of work-related injury or illness. Recent immigrant workers experience increased risk of OHS vulnerability. In particular, this vulnerability results from exposure to hazards in combination with inadequate levels of empowerment to protect themselves in the workplace. Policy-makers, advocates, and employers should implement strategies that not only build workplaces where occupational hazards are minimized but also ensure immigrant workers are empowered to act on their workplace rights and engaged to improve workplace safety.

Healthcare providers' experience with the management of mental health conditions in the context of Workers' Compensation.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how healthcare providers (HCPs) in Canada manage mental health claims and the return to work (RTW) of injured workersOBJECTIVE:To examine HCPs' experience and challenges on the treatment of mental health conditions (MHCs) in the context of Workers' Compensation (WC) processes and their involvement in RTW. METHODS: Ninety-seven interviews with HCPs (general practitioners, n = 59; allied HCPs, n = 19; specialists, n = 19) were conducted in British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Newfoundland. A thematic content analysis was used to analyze interviews. RESULTS: HCPs reported that while RTW is extolled at virtually all costs by WC boards, they did not always see it as beneficial. Most HCPs were convinced that successful recovery and RTW depend on being aware of how mental and physical health is intertwined and treating both issues. Organizational barriers within WC processes and adversarial relationships between injured workers (IWs) and WC boards made it difficult for HCPs to adequately treat patients and facilitate RTW. Dealing with IWs' MHCs and their emotional distress due to 'going through WC systems' was challenging. CONCLUSIONS: WC boards must identify how policies can be modified to mitigate compensation processes and RTW for WC claimants with MHC.

Family matters: compensable injury and the effect on family.

PURPOSE: It is well acknowledged that involvement in injury compensation processes can have a substantial impact on the recovery of the injured person. However, little attention has been given to the social or family consequences of compensable injury. The aims of this study were to better understand both the impact of compensable injury on the family and the role that families play after an injury, throughout the compensation process, and during return to work. METHODS: Eighteen injured persons and nine family members recruited through three compensation authorities in Victoria (Australia) were interviewed. A thematic analysis was used to identify the role that family played after injury and how family members were affected during the recovery and compensation process. RESULTS: The results highlight the important role family members play following a compensable injury, in addition to factors that impact family members' daily living, health, and well-being. The study suggests that compensation processes can have an impact on family members, despite compensation systems not formally acknowledging the family in policy or procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Compensation authorities should formally consider the role of family in recovery from injury, not only as one means of addressing the overall burden of injury but as a conduit for improving health and function among injured people. Implications for Rehabilitation Family members play an important role after compensable injury that includes providing administrative, instrumental, and emotional support. The recovery and injury compensation process can also have a major impact on family members, particularly in the case of prolonged and complex injuries and illnesses Compensation authorities should formally consider the role of family in the recovery from injury, not only as one means of addressing the overall burden of injury but, as a conduit for improving health and function among injured people.

Fear of (re)injury and return to work following compensable injury: qualitative insights from key stakeholders in Victoria, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Return to work (RTW) is important for recovery post-injury. Fear of (re)injury is a strong predictor of delayed RTW, and therefore much attention has been given to addressing injured workers' fear beliefs. However, RTW is a socially-negotiated process and it may be important to consider the wider social context of the injured worker, including the beliefs of the key people involved in their RTW journey. METHODS: This paper involves data collected as part of a wider study in which semi-structured interviews explored RTW from the perspectives of 93 key stakeholders: injured workers, GPs, employers and insurance case managers in Victoria, Australia. Inductive analysis of interview transcripts identified fear of (re)injury as a salient theme across all stakeholder groups. This presented an opportunity to analyse how the wider social context of the injured worker may influence fear and avoidance behaviour. Two co-authors performed inductive analysis of the theme 'fear of (re)injury'. Codes identified in the data were grouped into five categories. Between and within category analysis revealed three themes describing the contextual factors that may influence fear avoidance and RTW behaviour. RESULTS: Theme one described how injured workers engaged in a process of weighing up the risk of (re)injury in the workplace against the perceived benefits of RTW. Theme two described how workplace factors could influence an injured workers' perception of the risk of (re)injury in the workplace, including confidence that the source of the injury had been addressed, the availability and suitability of alternative duties. Theme three described other stakeholders' reluctance to accept injured workers back at work because of the fear that they might reinjure themselves. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings illustrate the need for a contextualised perspective of fear avoidance and RTW behaviour that includes the beliefs of other important people surrounding the injured worker (e.g. employers, family members, GPs). Existing models of health behaviour such as The Health Beliefs Model may provide useful frameworks for interventions targeting the affective, cognitive, social, organisational and policy factors that can influence fear avoidance or facilitate RTW following injury.

Does medical certification of workers with injuries influence patterns of health service use?

BACKGROUND: Among workers with injuries who seek compensation, a general practitioner (GP) usually plays an important role in a person's return to work (RTW) by advising if the worker is unfit for work (UFW), is able to work on alternate (ALT) duties or is fit for work and also providing referrals to other health service providers. OBJECTIVE: To examine patterns of health service utilization (HSU) in workers with injuries by condition and type of certificate issued by GP. METHODS: Zero-inflated negative binomial and logistic regressions were conducted for major healthcare services accessed over the 12-month period post-initial medical examination. Services included GP consultations, pharmacy, physiotherapy, occupational rehabilitation and psychology. RESULTS: The average number of physiotherapy services was greater in workers with musculoskeletal disorders, back pain and fractures. In contrast, the median number of psychological services was greater in mental health conditions (MHC). Workers with ALT certificates were more likely to use GPs, pharmacy and physiotherapy services. CONCLUSION: HSU in the 12 months post-initial medical certification varied substantially according to the worker's condition, certificate type, age, gender and residential location. Understanding these factors can facilitate more appropriate resource allocation; strategic thinking on optimal use of particular health services and enables better targeting of particular provider groups for more education on the health benefits of RTW.

Factors associated with sickness certification of injured workers by General Practitioners in Victoria, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Work-related injuries resulting in long-term sickness certification can have serious consequences for injured workers, their families, society, compensation schemes, employers and healthcare service providers. The aim of this study was to establish what factors potentially are associated with the type of sickness certification that General Practitioners (GPs) provide to injured workers following work-related injury in Victoria, Australia. METHODS: This was a retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted for compensation claims lodged by adults from 2003 to 2010. A logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of various factors on the likelihood that an injured worker would receive an alternate/modified duties (ALT, n = 28,174) vs. Unfit for work (UFW, n = 91,726) certificate from their GP. RESULTS: A total of 119,900 claims were analysed. The majority of the injured workers were males, mostly age of 45-54 years. Nearly half of the workers (49.9%) with UFW and 36.9% with ALT certificates had musculoskeletal injuries. The multivariate regression analysis revealed that for most occupations older men (55-64 years) were less likely to receive an ALT certificate, (OR = 0.86, (95%CI, 0.81 - 0.91)). Workers suffering musculoskeletal injuries or occupational diseases were nearly twice or three times at higher odds of receiving an ALT certificate when compared to fractures. Being seen by a GP experienced with workers' compensation increased the odds of receiving ALT certificate (OR = 1.16, (95%CI, 1.11 - 1.20)). Occupation and industry types were also important factors determining the type of certificate issued to the injured worker. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that specific groups of injured workers (i.e. older age, workers with mental health issues, in rural areas) are less likely to receive ALT certificates.

Is clinician refusal to treat an emerging problem in injury compensation systems?

OBJECTIVE: The reasons that doctors may refuse or be reluctant to treat have not been widely explored in the medical literature. To understand the ethical implications of reluctance to treat there is a need to recognise the constraints of doctors working in complex systems and to consider how these constraints may influence reluctance. The aim of this paper is to illustrate these constraints using the case of compensable injury in the Australian context. DESIGN: Between September and December 2012, a qualitative investigation involving face-to-face semistructured interviews examined the knowledge, attitudes and practices of general practitioners (GPs) facilitating return to work in people with compensable injuries. SETTING: Compensable injury management in general practice in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 25 GPs who were treating, or had treated a patient with compensable injury. RESULTS: The practice of clinicians refusing treatment was described by all participants. While most GPs reported refusal to treat among their colleagues in primary and specialist care, many participants also described their own reluctance to treat people with compensable injuries. Reasons offered included time and financial burdens, in addition to the clinical complexities involved in compensable injury management. CONCLUSIONS: In the case of compensable injury management, reluctance and refusal to treat is likely to have a domino effect by increasing the time and financial burden of clinically complex patients on the remaining clinicians. This may present a significant challenge to an effective, sustainable compensation system. Urgent research is needed to understand the extent and implications of reluctance and refusal to treat and to identify strategies to engage clinicians in treating people with compensable injuries.

Systematic review of qualitative literature on occupational health and safety legislation and regulatory enforcement planning and implementation.

OBJECTIVE: The ability of occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation and regulatory enforcement to prevent workplace injuries and illnesses is contingent on political, economic, and organizational conditions. This systematic review of qualitative research articles considers how OHS legislation and regulatory enforcement are planned and implemented. METHODS: A comprehensive search of peer-reviewed, English-language articles published between 1990 and 2013 yielded 11 947 articles. We identified 34 qualitative articles as relevant, 18 of which passed our quality assessment and proceeded to meta-ethnographic synthesis. RESULTS: The synthesis yielded four main themes: OHS regulation formation, regulation challenges, inspector organization, and worker representation in OHS. It illuminates how OHS legislation can be based on normative suppositions about worker and employer behavior and shaped by economic and political resources of parties. It also shows how implementation of OHS legislation is affected by "general duty" law, agency coordination, resourcing of inspectorates, and ability of workers to participate in the system. CONCLUSIONS: The review identifies methodological gaps and identifies promising areas for further research in "grey" zones of legislation implementation.

General practitioners and sickness certification for injury in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Strong evidence supports an early return to work after injury as a way to improve recovery. In Australia, General Practitioners (GPs) see about 96 % of injured workers, making them the main gatekeepers to workers' entitlements. Most people with compensable injuries in Australia are certified as "unfit to work" by their GP, with a minority of patients certified for modified work duties. The reasons for this apparent dissonance between evidence and practice remain unexplored. Little is known about the factors that influence GP sickness certification behaviour in Australia. The aim of this study is to describe the factors influencing Australian GPs certification practice through qualitative interviews with four key stakeholders. METHODS: From September to December 2012, 93 semi-structured interviews were undertaken in Melbourne, Australia. Participants included GPs, injured workers, employers and compensation agents. Data were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Five themes describing factors influencing GP certification were identified: 1. Divergent stakeholder views about the GP's role in facilitating return to work; 2. Communication between the four stakeholder groups; 3. Conflict between the stakeholder groups; 4. Allegations of GPs and injured workers misusing the compensation system and 5. The layout and content of the sickness certificate itself. CONCLUSION: By exploring GP certification practice from the perspectives of four key stakeholders, this study suggests that certification is an administrative and clinical task underpinned by a host of social and systemic factors. The findings highlight opportunities such as practice guideline development and improvements to the sickness certificate itself that may be targeted to improve GP sickness certification behaviour and return to work outcomes in an Australian context.

Healing or harming? Healthcare provider interactions with injured workers and insurers in workers' compensation systems.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare providers (HCPs) are influential in the injured worker's recovery process and fulfil many roles in the delivery of health services. Interactions between HCPs and insurers can also affect injured workers' engagement in rehabilitation and subsequently their recovery and return to work. Consideration of the injured workers' perceptions and experiences as consumers of medical and compensation services can provide vital information about the quality, efficacy and impact of such systems. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesize published qualitative research that focused on the interactions between injured workers, HCPs and insurers in workers' compensation systems in order to identify processes or interactions which impact injured worker recovery. METHOD: A search of six electronic databases for literature published between 1985 and 2012 revealed 1,006 articles. Screening for relevance identified 27 studies which were assessed for quality against set criteria. A final 13 articles of medium and high quality were retained for data extraction. RESULTS: Findings were synthesized using a meta-ethnographic approach. Injured workers reported that HCPs could play both healing and harming roles in their recovery. Supportive patient-centred interaction with HCPs is important for injured workers. Difficult interactions between HCPs and insurers were highlighted in themes of adversarial relations and organisational pressures. Insurer and compensation system processes exerted an influence on the therapeutic relationship. Recommendations to improve relationships included streamlining administrative demands and increasing education and communication between the parties. CONCLUSION: Injured workers with long term complex injuries experience difficulties with healthcare in the workers' compensation context. Changes in insurer administrative demands and compensation processes could increase HCP participation and job satisfaction. This in turn may improve injured worker recovery. Further research into experiences of distinct healthcare professions with workers' compensation systems is warranted.

Interactions between injured workers and insurers in workers' compensation systems: a systematic review of qualitative research literature.

INTRODUCTION: Work-related injury is a major public health problem and a worker's recovery can be shaped by their interactions with employers, healthcare providers and the workers' compensation system. Most research on the effects of compensation has concentrated on examining outcomes rather than considering the compensation process itself. There has been little attention paid to the interactions between stakeholders and only recently has the client's view been considered as worthy of investigation. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesize findings from peer reviewed qualitative studies that investigated injured workers interactions with insurers in workers' compensation systems. METHOD: A search of six electronic library databases revealed 1,006 articles. After screening for relevance, 18 articles were read in full and a search of those bibliographies revealed a further nine relevant articles. Quality assessment of the 27 studies resulted in a final 13 articles of medium and high quality being retained for data extraction. RESULTS: Included studies focused mainly on experiences of injured workers, many of whom had long term claims. Findings were synthesized using a meta-ethnographic approach. Six themes were identified which characterised the interactions between insurers and injured workers. The majority of interactions were negative and resulted in considerable psychosocial consequences for injured workers. Positive interactions were less frequently reported and included respectful, understanding and supportive communication and efficient service from insurers. CONCLUSION: Findings from this synthesis support the growing consensus that involvement in compensation systems contributes to poorer outcomes for claimants. Interactions between insurers and injured workers were interwoven in cyclical and pathogenic relationships, which influence the development of secondary injury in the form of psychosocial consequences instead of fostering recovery of injured workers. This review suggests that further research is required to investigate positive interactions and identify mechanisms to better support and prevent secondary psychosocial harm to injured workers.

Another Person in the Room: Using Interpreters During Interviews With Immigrant Workers.

Cross-language research poses many challenges. When researchers and participants do not speak the same language, meanings expressed by participants might not be understood in the same way by researchers, and the richness of participants' experiences might be lost. This can lead to the misrepresentation and silencing of issues faced by these participants, especially newcomers. In this article, we critically examine our experience conducting qualitative interviews with injured immigrant workers with the help of professional interpreters. Using examples from our field notes and transcripts, we outline some of the key difficulties we faced: varying styles of interpretation, breeches of interview conventions, and miscommunications with interpreters. We discuss how these issues affected our study design, rapport with participants and, ultimately, data quality. We end with a discussion of how to improve cross-language and cross-cultural research.

Mental health claims management and return to work: qualitative insights from Melbourne, Australia.

PURPOSE: Mental health conditions (MHC) are an increasing reason for claiming injury compensation in Australia; however little is known about how these claims are managed by different gatekeepers to injury entitlements. This study, drawing on the views of four stakeholders-general practitioners (GPs), injured persons, employers and compensation agents, aims to describe current management of MHC claims and to identify the current barriers to return to work (RTW) for injured persons with a MHC claim and/or mental illness. METHODS: Ninety-three in-depth interviews were undertaken with GPs, compensation agents, employers and injured persons. Data were collected in Melbourne, Australia. Thematic techniques were used to analyse data. RESULTS: MHC claims were complex to manage because of initial assessment and diagnostic difficulties related to the invisibility of the injury, conflicting medical opinions and the stigma associated with making a MHC claim. Mental illness also developed as a secondary issue in the recovery process. These factors made MHC difficult to manage and impeded timely RTW. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to undertake further research (e.g. guideline development) to improve current practice in order to enable those with MHC claims to make a timely RTW. Further education and training interventions (e.g. on diagnosis and management of MHC) are also needed to enable GPs, employers and compensation agents to better assess and manage MHC claims.