Psychologically based interventions for adults with chronic neuropathic pain: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: As psychologically based interventions have been shown to have clinical utility for adults with chronic pain generally, a similar benefit might be expected in the management of chronic neuropathic pain (NeuP). However, to date, this has not been established, with existing systematic reviews on this topic being hampered by the scarcity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This review aimed to identify the type of psychologically based interventions studied for adults with chronic NeuP. It also aimed to assess whether there are enough RCTs to justify undertaking an updated systematic review. METHODS: Seven databases and 2 clinical trial registries were searched for NeuP and psychologically based interventions from database inception to December 2021, and the search was updated in February 2023. The search was broadened by reviewing the reference list of included studies and contacting field experts. Predetermined study characteristics were extracted. RESULTS: Of 4682 records screened, 33 articles (less than 1%) met the eligibility criteria. Four broad intervention approaches were observed, including cognitive-behavioral approaches (n = 16), mindfulness/meditation (n = 10), trauma-focused therapy (n = 4), and hypnosis (n = 3). Thirteen RCTs were identified, and of these, 9 retained 20 participants in each arm after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive-behavioral therapy was the most common therapeutic approach identified, whereas mindfulness/meditation was the most frequently used technique. Almost half to two-thirds of the studies reported significant improvements in pain, disability, or distress, which suggests that psychologically based interventions are potentially beneficial for adults with chronic NeuP. An updated systematic review seems warranted. STUDY REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io) (December 6, 2021; DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/WNSTM).

Principles of ideal diagnostic regulation and the IVDR.

This article discusses principles and concepts for ideal regulatory frameworks for diagnostics, and the expression of those principles in the EU IVDR. The authors present the benefits of regulatory frameworks and implementation approaches for diagnostics that are risk-based, globally convergent, connected, nimble and efficient, under the IVDR and with a future outlook. While many expressions of these principles can already be found in the EU IVDR text, and in its implementation approaches, their further embrace is needed in future EU diagnostic regulation. In the long term outlook, risk-based approaches can be extended to comprise entity-based excellence appraisals. Globally convergent approaches can be more explicit in e.g. qualification and classification of products. This will also help further reliance models. Better connections and cooperation between regulators across the healthcare spectrum including pharmaceuticals should be fostered. Nimble approaches such as Emergency Use Authorisations for pandemics are essential in highly regulated schemes like the IVDR and beyond. Finally, regulatory efficiency as in timely availability of IT infrastructure and oversight mechanisms is a distinguishing attribute of globally competitive diagnostic regulatory schemes. All the above needs consideration in the long term efforts to modernize the EU regulatory system, so that diagnostics can play their important role in clinical research as well as along the entire care continuum in the EU.

The Job Leeway Scale: Initial Evaluation of a Self-report Measure of Health-Related Flexibility and Latitude at Work.

Purpose Evidence suggests that workers manage health-related challenges at work, in part, by using available leeway to perform work differently. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Job Leeway Scale (JLS), a new 18-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess worker perceptions of available flexibility and latitude to manage health-related challenges at work. Methods Workers seeking assistance for workplace difficulties due to chronic medical conditions (n = 119, 83% female, median age = 49) completed the JLS along with other workplace and health measures. Construct validity was assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and concurrent validity was assessed by associations with related measures. Results Mean item scores ranged from 2.13 to 4.16 within a possible range of 0-6. The EFA supported three underlying factors: organizational leeway (9 items), task leeway (6 items), and staffing leeway (3 items). Internal consistency (alpha) ranged from 0.78 to 0.91 for subscale scores and 0.94 for the total score. The JLS showed moderate correlations with other work outcome measures including work fatigue, self-efficacy, engagement, and productivity. Conclusion The JLS is a promising new measure with initial support for its reliability and validity to assess worker beliefs of available flexibility to manage health symptoms at work, and this construct may have organizational implications for worker support and accommodation.

Preventing Pain and Stress-Related Ill-Health in Employees: A 6-Months Follow-Up of a Psychosocial Program in a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

Purpose Pain and stress-related ill-health are major causes of long-term disability and sick leave. This study evaluated the effects of a brief psychosocial program, which previously has been tested for an at-risk population of employees. Methods The Effective Communication within the Organization (ECO) program, where supervisors and employees were trained in communication and problem solving, was compared to an active control consisting of psychoeducative lectures (PE) about pain and stress in a cluster randomized controlled trial. First-line supervisors were randomized to ECO or PE, and a total of 191 mainly female employees with self-reported pain and/or stress-related ill-health were included. The hybrid format programs consisted of 2-3 group sessions. Sick leave data was collected from social insurance registers, before and 6-months after the program. Secondary outcomes (work ability, work limitations, pain-disability risk, exhaustion symptoms, perceived stress, perceived health, quality of life, perceived communication and support from supervisors) were assessed at baseline, post intervention, and at 6-months follow-up. Results No effects were observed on primary or secondary outcome variables. Pain symptoms were common (89%), however a lower proportion (30%) were identified as at risk for long-term pain disability, which might explain the lack of evident effects. The Covid-19 pandemic affected participation rates and delivery of intervention. Conclusion In this study, preventive effects of the ECO program were not supported. Altogether, the findings point at the importance of selecting participants for prevention based on screening of psychosocial risk. Further research on workplace communication and support, and impact on employee health is warranted.

Uncommon causes of ischaemic stroke: how to approach the diagnosis.

Stroke is a common neurological emergency and although most cases are associated with traditional vascular risk factors leading to cerebral ischaemia by well-recognised pathophysiological mechanisms, around 4% of ischaemic strokes are due to rare conditions. These are important to recognise due to their different management, which is often specific and effective, and due to their different prognosis from otherwise cryptogenic ischaemic strokes. We outline a practical approach to identifying uncommon causes of ischaemic stroke by highlighting diagnostic 'red flags' and propose a structured approach to investigating them.

Psychosocial characteristics of chronic pain in cancer survivors referred to an Australian multidisciplinary pain clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical and psychosocial characteristics of chronic pain in cancer survivors referred to one Australian hospital's ambulatory pain clinic over a 7-year period (2013-19), and to compare cancer treatment-related pain with comorbid non-malignant pain. METHOD: Retrospective chart review including responses to standardized self-report questionnaires (Brief Pain Inventory, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, Pain Catastrophizing Scale), routinely collected in all patients referred to pain clinics at Australian and New Zealand hospitals. RESULTS: Of 3510 new referrals during the study period, 267 (7.5%) had a history of cancer and 176 (5.0%) met the study's eligibility criteria. Their average age was 63 ± 13 years, with 55% female. Breast cancer survivors were commonest, followed by hematological, prostate, melanoma, and colorectal, a median of 3 years post-diagnosis. Pain was attributed to cancer treatment in 87 (49%), surgery being the commonest modality. Multimodal treatment (n = 89, 58%) was significantly commoner in the treatment-related pain group (p < 0.001). Average pain severity was moderate, as was pain-related disability and distress. Pain cognitions were often maladaptive (low pain self-efficacy, high pain catastrophizing), predicted by pre-existing anxiety and depression. Associations between pain cognitions and outcomes were medium-to-large. Differences between treatment pain and comorbid pain were small-to-medium. Their scores were similar to Australian pain clinic norms. CONCLUSION: Cancer treatment causes tissue damage, but pain-related distress and disability in survivors is associated with maladaptive pain cognitions. Survivors with poor pain outcomes should be evaluated for unhelpful thoughts and beliefs especially when they have pre-existing depression or anxiety.

A Worksite Self-management Program for Workers with Chronic Health Conditions Improves Worker Engagement and Retention, but not Workplace Function.

Purpose An increasing number of workers in the US have chronic health conditions that limit their ability to work, and few worksite interventions have been tested to improve worker coping and problem solving at work. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a worksite-based health self-management program designed to improve workplace function among workers with chronic health conditions. Methods We conducted a randomized, controlled trial of a worksite self-management program ("Manage at Work") (clinicaltrials.gov #NCT01978392) for workers with chronic health conditions (N = 119; 82% female, ages 20-69). Most workers were recruited from the health care or light manufacturing industry sectors. Workers attended a 5-session, facilitated psychoeducational program using concepts of health self-management, self-efficacy, ergonomics, and communication. Changes on outcomes of work engagement, work limitation, job satisfaction, work fatigue, work self-efficacy, days absent, and turnover intention at 6-month follow-up were compared to wait-list controls. Results The most prevalent chronic health conditions were musculoskeletal pain, headaches, vision problems, gastrointestinal disorders, respiratory disorders, and mental health disorders. The self-management program showed greater improvement in work engagement and turnover intent at 6-month follow-up, but there was no evidence of a parallel reduction in perceived work limitation. Trends for improved outcomes of work self-efficacy, job satisfaction, and work fatigue in the intervention group did not reach statistical significance in a group x time interaction test. Conclusions Offering a worksite self-management program to workers with chronic health conditions may be a feasible and beneficial strategy to engage and retain skilled workers who are risking disability.Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov #NCT01978392.

Deprescribing long-term opioid therapy in patients with chronic pain.

Proposed regulatory changes will limit the access to opioids by Australian patients with chronic pain, many of whom are under the care of consultant physicians. This review summarises points of consensus on opioid deprescribing that emerged from the interaction of an expert panel and the audience at a symposium on the topic held in Sydney in 2019. Each of these consensus points speaks to the need for an individualised, patient-centred approach. In other words, 'treat the patient, not the pill count'.

Psychological therapies for the prevention of migraine in adults.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a common neurological problem associated with the highest burden amongst neurological conditions in terms of years lived with disability. Medications can be used as prophylaxis or rescue medicines, but are costly and not always effective. A range of psychological interventions have been developed to manage migraine. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of psychological therapies for the prevention of migraine in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from their inception until July 2018, and trials registries in the UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand for randomised controlled trials of any psychological intervention for adults with migraine. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of a psychological therapy for people with chronic or episodic migraine, with or without aura. Interventions could be compared to another active treatment (psychological or medical), an attention-placebo (e.g. supportive counselling) or other placebo, routine care, or waiting-list control. We excluded studies where fewer than 15 participants completed each arm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted study characteristics and outcome data at post-treatment and the longest available follow-up. We analysed intervention versus control comparisons for the primary outcome of migraine frequency. We measured migraine frequency using days with migraines or number of migraine attacks measured in the four weeks after treatment. In addition, we analysed the following secondary outcomes: responder rate (the proportion of participants with a 50% reduction in migraine frequency between the four weeks prior to and the four weeks after treatment); migraine intensity; migraine duration; migraine medication usage; mood; quality of life; migraine-related disability; and proportion of participants reporting adverse events during the treatment. We included these variables, where available, at follow-up, the timing of which varied between the studies. We used the GRADE approach to judge the quality of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We found 21 RCTs including 2482 participants with migraine, and we extracted meta-analytic data from 14 of these studies. The majority of studies recruited participants through advertisements, included participants with migraine according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) criteria and those with and without aura. Most intervention arms were a form of behavioural or cognitive-behavioural therapy. The majority of comparator arms were no treatment, routine care or waiting list. Interventions varied from one 20-minute session to 14 hours of intervention. No study had unequivocally low risk of bias; all had at least one domain at high risk of bias, and 20 had two to five domains at high risk. Reporting of randomisation procedures and allocation concealment were at high or unclear risk of bias. We downgraded the quality of evidence for outcomes to very low, due to very serious limitations in study quality and imprecision. Reporting in trials was poor; we found no preregistrations stipulating the outcomes, or demonstrating equivalent expectations between groups. Few studies reported our outcomes of interest, most only reported outcomes post treatment; follow-up data were sparse.Post-treatment effectsWe found no evidence of an effect of psychological interventions for migraine frequency in number of migraines or days with migraine (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.13; 4 studies, 681 participants; very low-quality evidence).The responder rate (proportion of participants with migraine frequency reduction of more than 50%) was greater for those who received a psychological intervention compared to control: 101/186 participants (54%) with psychological therapy; 37/152 participants (24%) with control (risk ratio (RR) 2.21, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.98; 4 studies, 338 participants; very low-quality evidence). We found no effect of psychological therapies on migraine intensity (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.02; 4 studies, 685 participants). There were no data for migraine duration (hours of migraine per day). There was no effect on migraine medication usage (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.24; 2 studies, 483 participants), mood (mean difference (MD) 0.08, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.49; 4 studies, 432 participants), quality of life (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.26; 4 studies, 565 participants), or migraine-related disability (SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.34 to 0.00; 6 studies, 952 participants). The proportion of participants reporting adverse events did not differ between those receiving psychological treatment (9/107; 8%) and control (30/101; 30%) (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.00 to 7.85; 2 studies, 208 participants). Only two studies reported adverse events and so we were unable to draw any conclusions.We rated evidence from all studies as very low quality.Follow-upOnly four studies reported any follow-up data. Follow-ups ranged from four months following intervention to 11 months following intervention. There was no evidence of an effect on any outcomes at follow-up (very low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review identified 21 studies of psychological interventions for the management of migraine. We did not find evidence that psychological interventions affected migraine frequency, a result based on four studies of primarily brief treatments. Those who received psychological interventions were twice as likely to be classified as responders in the short term, but this was based on very low-quality evidence and there was no evidence of an effect of psychological intervention compared to control at follow-up. There was no evidence of an effect of psychological interventions on medication usage, mood, migraine-related disability or quality of life. There was no evidence of an effect of psychological interventions on migraine frequency in the short-term or long-term. In terms of adverse events, we were unable to draw conclusions as there was insufficient evidence. High and unclear risk of bias in study design and reporting, small numbers of participants, performance and detection bias meant that we rated all evidence as very low quality. Therefore, we conclude that there is an absence of high-quality evidence to determine whether psychological interventions are effective in managing migraine in adults and we are uncertain whether there is any difference between psychological therapies and controls.

Positive recovery for low-risk injuries screened by the short form - Örebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire following road traffic injury: evidence from an inception cohort study in New South Wales, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis of musculoskeletal disorders following injury is essential in determining appropriate treatment and care. A generic validated prognostic tool to stratify risk of poor recovery for people with musculoskeletal injuries after road traffic crash is not available. This study aimed to examine differences in recovery, return to work and health related quality of life between low and high-risk of poor recovery people with musculoskeletal injuries stratified by the Short form - Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (SF-OMPSQ). METHODS: In an inception cohort study, participants with non-fracture musculoskeletal injury with the main site being the neck, lower back or lower limb were stratified into low (score ≤ 50) and high (score > 50) risk of poor recovery using the SF-OMPSQ score at baseline. We assessed the proportion of fully recovered participants (Global Perceived Effect scale ≥4), the proportion returning to work and changes in short form 12-item (SF-12) scores between baseline and 6-month follow-up in low and high-risk groups. Modified Poisson regression was used to estimate the adjusted risk ratio (RR) of being recovered and return to work in the low and high-risk groups. Paired t-test was used to compare changes in SF-12 physical and mental component summary scales, and chi-square test was used to assess the significance of the risk ratio of fully recovered between low and high-risk groups. RESULTS: The study included 498 participants (166 with neck, 78 with lower back and 254 with lower limb injuries). The proportion of being recovered was significantly higher in the low than the high-risk groups (Adjusted risk ratio: 2.96 [95% CI: 1.81 to 4.82]). Significantly more people in the low-risk group returned to work (91.0%) than the high-risk group (54.6%). People at low-risk had higher SF-12 scores at baseline and 6-month follow-up than those at high-risk. There were no differences between injury types for recovery and return to work at 6 months. CONCLUSION: The SF-OMPSQ could be recommended as a generic prognostic tool to identify individuals with musculoskeletal injuries early after road traffic injury, who would have a higher or lower likelihood of recovering or returning fully to pre-injury work. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical trial registry identification number - ACTRN12613000889752. Registered 09 August 2013.

Psychological Features and Their Relationship to Movement-Based Subgroups in People Living With Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the distribution of higher psychological risk features within movement-based subgroups for people with low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: Participants were recruited from physiotherapy clinics and community advertisements. Measures were collected at a university outpatient-based physiotherapy clinic. PARTICIPANTS: People (N=102) seeking treatment for LBP. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were subgrouped according to 3 classification schemes: Mechanical Diagnosis and Treatment (MDT), Treatment-Based Classification (TBC), and O'Sullivan Classification (OSC). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Questionnaires were used to categorize low-, medium-, and high-risk features based on depression, anxiety, and stress (Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 Items); fear avoidance (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire); catastrophizing and coping (Pain-Related Self-Symptoms Scale); and self-efficacy (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire). Psychological risk profiles were compared between movement-based subgroups within each scheme. RESULTS: Scores across all questionnaires revealed that most patients had low psychological risk profiles, but there were instances of higher (range, 1%-25%) risk profiles within questionnaire components. The small proportion of individuals with higher psychological risk scores were distributed between subgroups across TBC, MDT, and OSC schemes. CONCLUSIONS: Movement-based subgrouping alone cannot inform on individuals with higher psychological risk features.

Pain severity predicts depressive symptoms over and above individual illnesses and multimorbidity in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Multi-morbidity in older adults is commonly associated with depressed mood. Similarly, subjective reports of pain are also associated with both physical illness and increased depressive symptoms. However, whether pain independently contributes to the experience of depression in older people with multi-morbidity has not been studied. METHODS: In this study, participants were 1281 consecutive older adults presenting to one of 19 primary care services in Australia (recruitment rate = 75%). Participants were asked to indicate the presence of a number of common chronic illnesses, to rate their current pain severity and to complete the Geriatric Depression Scale. RESULTS: Results confirmed that the number of medical illnesses reported was strongly associated with depressive symptoms. Twenty-six percent of participants with multi-morbidity scored in the clinical range for depressive symptoms in comparison to 15% of participants with no illnesses or a single illness. In regression analyses, the presence of chronic pain (t = 5.969, p < 0.0005), diabetes (t = 4.309, p < 0.0005), respiratory (t = 3.720, p < 0.0005) or neurological illness (t = 2.701, p = 0.007) were all independent contributors to depressive symptoms. Even when controlling for each individual illness, and the overall number of illnesses (t = 2.207, p = 0.028), pain severity remained an independent predictor of depressed mood (F change = 28.866, p < 0.0005, t = 5.373, p < 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should consider screening for mood problems amongst those with multi-morbidity, particularly those who experience pain.

Health care professionals' attitudes towards evidence-based medicine in the workers' compensation setting: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Problems may arise during the approval process of treatment after a compensable work injury, which include excess paperwork, delays in approving services, disputes, and allegations of over-servicing. This is perceived as undesirable for injured people, health care professionals and claims managers, and costly to the health care system, compensation system, workplaces and society. Introducing an Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) decision tool in the workers' compensation system could provide a partial solution, by reducing uncertainty about effective treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate attitudes of health care professionals (HCP) to the potential implementation of an EBM tool in the workers' compensation setting. METHODS: The study has a mixed methods design. The quantitative study consisted of an online questionnaire asking about self-reported knowledge, attitudes and behaviour to EBM in general. The qualitative study consisted of interviews about an EBM tool being applied in the workers' compensation process. Participants were health care practitioners from different clinical specialties. They were recruited through the investigators' clinical networks and the workers' compensation government regulator's website. RESULTS: Participants completing the questionnaire (n = 231) indicated they were knowledgeable about the evidence-base in their field, but perceived some difficulties when applying EBM. General practitioners reported having the greatest obstacles to applying EBM. Participants who were interviewed (n = 15) perceived that an EBM tool in the workers' compensation setting could potentially have some advantages, such as reducing inappropriate treatment, or over-servicing, and providing guidance for clinicians. However, participants expressed substantial concerns that the EBM tool would not adequately reflect the impact of psychosocial factors on recovery. They also highlighted a lack of timeliness in decision making and proper assessment, particularly in pain management. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, HCP are supportive of EBM, but have strong concerns about implementation of EBM based decision making in the workers' compensation setting. The participants felt that an EBM tool should not be applied rigidly and should take into account clinical judgement and patient variability and preferences. In general, the treatment approval process in the workers' compensation insurance system is a sensitive area, in which the interaction between HCP and claims managers can be improved.

Predictors of time to claim closure following a non-catastrophic injury sustained in a motor vehicle crash: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that exposure to the compensation system (including time to case closure) could adversely influence a persons' recovery following injury. However, the long-term predictors of time to claim closure following minor road traffic injuries remain unclear. We aimed to assess a wide spectrum of factors that could influence time to claim closure (socio-demographic, compensation-related, health, psychosocial and pre-injury factors) over 24 months following a non-catastrophic injury. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 364 participants involved in a compensation scheme following a motor vehicle crash. We used a telephone-administered questionnaire to obtain information on potential explanatory variables. Information on time to claim closure was obtained from an insurance regulatory authority maintained database, and was classified as the duration between the crash date and claim settlement date, and categorized into < 12 (early), > 12-24 (medium) and > 24 months (late). RESULTS: Just over half of claimants (54 %) had settled their claim by 12 months, while 17 % and 30 % took > 12-24 months and > 24 months for claim closure, respectively. Whiplash at baseline was associated with claim closure time of > 12-24 months versus < 12 months: multivariable-adjusted OR 2.38 (95 % CI 1.06-5.39). Claimants who were overweight/obese versus normal/underweight at the time of injury were ~3.0-fold more likely to settle their claim at > 12-24 months than < 12 months. Consulting a lawyer was associated with a 10.4- and 21.0-fold increased likelihood of settling a claim at > 12-24 months and > 24 months, respectively. Each 1-unit increase in Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire scores at baseline was associated with greater odds of both medium (> 12-24 months) and delayed claim settlement date (> 24 months): multivariable-adjusted OR 1.04 (95 % CU 1.01-1.07) and 1.02 (95 % CI 1.00-1.05), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Around a third of claimants with a minor injury had not settled by 24 months. Health-related factors and lawyer involvement independently influenced time to claim closure.

Early Workplace Communication and Problem Solving to Prevent Back Disability: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Among High-Risk Workers and Their Supervisors.

Purpose There is a clear need for interventions that successfully prevent the development of disability due to back pain. We hypothesized that an intervention aimed at both the worker and the workplace could be effective. Hence, we tested the effects of a new early intervention, based on the misdirected problem solving model, aimed at both workers at risk of long-term impairments and their workplace. Methods Supervisors of volunteers with back pain, no red flags, and a high score on a screen (Örebro Musculoskeletal Screening Questionnaire) were randomized to either an evidence based treatment as usual (TAU) or to a worker and workplace package (WWP). The WWP intervention included communication and problem solving skills for the patient and their immediate supervisor. The key outcome variables of work absence due to pain, health-care utilization, perceived health, and pain intensity were collected before, after and at a 6 month follow up. Results The WWP showed significantly larger improvements relative to the TAU for work absence due to pain, perceived health, and health-care utilization. Both groups improved on pain ratings but there was no significant difference between the groups. The WWP not only had significantly fewer participants utilizing health care and work absence due to pain, but the number of health care visits and days absent were also significantly lower than the TAU. Conclusions The WWP with problem solving and communication skills resulted in fewer days off work, fewer health care visits and better perceived health. This supports the misdirected problem solving model and indicates that screening combined with an active intervention to enhance skills is quite successful and likely cost-effective. Future research should replicate and extend these findings with health-economic analyses.

Implementation Science and Employer Disability Practices: Embedding Implementation Factors in Research Designs.

Purpose For work disability research to have an impact on employer policies and practices it is important for such research to acknowledge and incorporate relevant aspects of the workplace. The goal of this article is to summarize recent theoretical and methodological advances in the field of Implementation Science, relate these to research of employer disability management practices, and recommend future research priorities. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration culminating in an invited 3-day conference, "Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability", held October 14-16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience. Results A 4-phase implementation model including both outer and inner contexts was adopted as the most appropriate conceptual framework, and aligned well with the set of process evaluation factors described in both the work disability prevention literature and the grey literature. Innovative interventions involving disability risk screening and psychologically-based interventions have been slow to gain traction among employers and insurers. Research recommendations to address this are : (1) to assess organizational culture and readiness for change in addition to individual factors; (2) to conduct process evaluations alongside controlled trials; (3) to analyze decision-making factors among stakeholders; and (4 ) to solicit input from employers and insurers during early phases of study design. Conclusions Future research interventions involving workplace support and involvement to prevent disability may be more feasible for implementation if organizational decision-making factors are imbedded in research designs and interventions are developed to take account of these influences.

Employer Policies and Practices to Manage and Prevent Disability: Foreword to the Special Issue.

Purpose Employer policies and practices have been shown to impact workplace disability, but research in this area has waned in recent years despite an aging workforce, a growing prevalence of chronic health conditions, and a larger proportion of working-age adults on permanent work disability in many jurisdictions. The purpose of this article is to describe the background rationale and methodology for an invited conference designed to improve research of employer strategies to curtail work disability. Methods A multidisciplinary team of 26 international researchers with published research in employer-based disability management or related fields were invited to attend a 3-day conference in Hopkinton, Massachusetts, USA. The overall goal was to review the status of current research of workplace disability management and prevention, examine its relevance for employer decision-making, compare conceptual frameworks or theoretical perspectives, and recommend future research directions. Working groups were organized and draft manuscripts were prepared in advance. Conference activities included working group presentations and critiques, discussions with a panel of industry consultants and advisors, group interaction and debate, generation of final recommendations, and manuscript revision. Results/Conclusion Six principal domains were established with respect to future research: (a) further elucidation of the key workplace factors that buffer the disabling effects of injury and illness; (b) more innovative and feasible options for workplace intervention; (c) measurement of workplace-relevant disability outcomes; (d) a stronger theoretical framework for understanding the factors behind employer uptake and implementation; (e) a focus on special clinical populations and occupations where disability risk is most troubling; and (f) better representation of workers and employers that reflect the diverse and changing nature of work. Final comments and recommendations of the working groups are presented in the following six articles in this special issue of the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation. Conference attendees recommended changes in methodology, collaboration strategies, and theoretical perspectives to improve the practical and scientific impact of future research of employer practices.