With the overall objective of providing implication for clinical and research practices regarding the identification and measurement of modifiable predicting factors for return to work (RTW) in people with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and common mental disorders (CMDs), this study 1) systematically examined and synthetized the research evidence available in the literature on the topic, and 2) critically evaluated the tools used to measure each identified factor. A systematic search of prognostic studies was conducted, considering four groups of keywords: 1) population (i.e., MSDs or CMDs), 2) study design (prospective), 3) modifiable factors, 4) outcomes of interest (i.e., RTW). Studies showing high risk of bias were eliminated. Tools used to measure prognostic factors were assessed using psychometric and usability criteria. From the 78 studies that met inclusion criteria, 19 (for MSDs) and 5 (for CMDs) factors reaching moderate or strong evidence were extracted. These factors included work accommodations, RTW expectations, job demands (physical), job demands (psychological), job strain, work ability, RTW self-efficacy, expectations of recovery, locus of control, referred pain (back pain), activities as assessed with disability questionnaires, pain catastrophizing, coping strategies, fears, illness behaviours, mental vitality, a positive health change, sleep quality, and participation. Measurement tools ranged from single-item tools to multi-item standardized questionnaires or subscales. The former generally showed low psychometric properties but excellent usability, whereas the later showed good to excellent psychometric properties and variable usability. The rigorous approach to the selection of eligible studies allowed the identification of a relatively small set of prognostic factors, but with a higher level of certainty. For each factor, the present tool assessment allows an informed choice to balance psychometric and usability criteria.

BACKGROUND: In addition to several sequelae of post-COVID-19, individuals also experience significant limitations in work ability, resulting in negative consequences for the return-to-work (RTW) process. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the impact of post-COVID-19 on work ability and RTW of individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.
METHODS: Studies on the work ability and RTW of patients with post-COVID-19 (more than 12 weeks after an acute SARS-CoV-2 infection) were regarded eligible for inclusion. Systematic search of literature was performed up to March 2023 using five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and WHO COVID 19). Study selection followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) Statement. A meta-analysis estimated the overall success rate of RTW. The risk of bias of the included studies was evaluated with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS).
RESULTS: 19 relevant studies, published between 2021 and 2023, were included in the systematic review, involving 21.155 patients from 14 different countries. The findings indicate that a significant proportion of individuals with post-COVID-19 experience persistent symptoms and functional impairments, with fatigue being the most prominent symptom. These persistent symptoms can have a considerable (negative) impact on individuals\' physical and psychological capacity to participate in work-related activities, leading to lower work ability and increased absenteeism. The RTW for post-COVID-19 patients is complex, with approximately 60.9% of patients successfully returning to work after 12 or more weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among those who successfully returning to work, a considerable number need modifications in their work duties or hours to cope with residual impairments. Factors such as workplace accommodations, supportive policies, and occupational rehabilitation programs play a crucial role in facilitating successful RTW.
CONCLUSIONS: The systematic review underscores the substantial impact of post-COVID-19 on work-related outcomes. The implications of this research highlight the need for healthcare providers, employers, and policymakers to collaborate in creating inclusive work environments and implementing tailored rehabilitation programs to support individuals recovering from post-COVID-19. Further research should focus on long-term follow-up studies with mixed methods to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the long-term consequences of post-COVID-19 on work ability and RTW outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42023385436.

Chronic low back pain (LBP) represents a leading cause of absenteeism from work. An accurate knowledge of complex interactions is essential in understanding the difficulties of return to work (RTW) experienced by workers affected by chronic LBP. This study aims to identify factors related to chronic LBP, the worker, and the psycho-social environment that could predict and influence the duration of an episode of sick leave due to chronic LBP.Studies reporting the relation between prognostic factors and absenteeism from work in patients with LBP were included. The selected studies were grouped by prognostic factors. The results were measured in absolute terms, relative terms, survival curve, or duration of sick leave. The level of evidence was defined by examining the quality and the appropriateness of findings across studies in terms of significance and direction of relationship for each prognostic factor.A total of 20 studies were included. Prognostic factors were classified in clinical, psycho-social, and social workplace, reaching a total of 31 constructs. Global conditions with less favorable repercussions on worker\'s lives resulted in a delay in time to RTW. Older age, female, higher pain or disability, depression, higher physical work demands, and abuse of smoke and alcohol have shown strong level of evidence for negative outcomes.High global health well-being, great socioeconomic status, and good mental health conditions are decisive in RTW outcomes. Interventions that aim at RTW of employee\'s sick-listed with LBP should focus on psycho-social aspects, health behaviors, and workplace characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the body of evidence of the effects of work-directed interventions on return-to-work for people on sick leave due to common mental disorders (i.e., mild to moderate depression, anxiety, adjustment disorders and reactions to severe stress).
METHODS: The systematic review was conducted in accordance with an a priori developed and registered protocol (Prospero CRD42021235586). The certainty of evidence was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations.
RESULTS: We reviewed 14,794 records published between 2015 and 2021. Of these, eight RCTs published in eleven articles were included in the analysis.
METHODS: Working age adults (18 to 64 years), on sick leave due to mild to moderate depression, anxiety, adjustment disorders or reactions to severe stress.
METHODS: Work-directed interventions.
METHODS: No comparator, Standard care, or other measures.
RESULTS: return to work, number of days on sick leave, income. Overall, the effects of work-focused CBT and work-focused team-based support on RTW resulted in increased or faster return-to-work compared with standard care or no intervention (low certainty of evidence). The effects of Individual Placement and Support showed no difference in RTW compared with standard care (very low certainty of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS: Interventions involving the workplace could increase the probability of RTW. Areas in need of improvement in the included studies, for example methodological issues, are discussed. Further, suggestions are made for improving methodological rigor when conducting large scale trials.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] on work productivity remains unclear. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we quantify work-related outcomes and employment data among persons with IBD.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, Scopus, ProQuest, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to February 2023, to identify studies on work productivity in persons with IBD aged > 18 years. Work productivity was defined primarily by the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI] questionnaire which includes absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work impairment, and non-work activity impairment. In addition, we included data on employment, sick leaves, disability pensions, and indirect costs due to productivity loss. Pooled effect analysis was conducted using a random-effects model for pooled estimates of continuous and proportional data with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: Among all patients with IBD, the pooled estimates were 16.4% for absenteeism, 35.9% for presenteeism, 39.4% for overall work impairment, and 46.0% for non-work activity impairment. Indirect costs from overall work impairment were 5131.09 euros/patient/year. Only two-thirds of IBD patients were employed, and one in three lost their jobs due to IBD. Among those employed, 39.5% report sick days, 21.3% report work disability, and 12.3% receive disability pensions. Most studies demonstrate clinically meaningful improvements in work productivity with medical and/or surgical therapies.
CONCLUSIONS: Persons with IBD experience significant work impairment and associated indirect costs. This highlights the need for appropriate workplace accommodations and timely medical therapy to alleviate the burden of disease and improve work outcomes.

There are a wide range of interventions that are designed to influence employer behaviour with respect to the employment of people with disabilities. This study presents the results of a systematic review looking at employer-focused interventions to improve disability employment, focusing on interventions or policies taking placing in high-income countries as per the OECD. This systematic review focuses on a broad range of potential employment-related outcomes, including the employment rate, time to return to work and length of sickness absence. The results of 71 papers that evaluate the effectiveness of a range of interventions were synthesised into a narrative review. Interventions are grouped into six broad categories: anti-discrimination legislation, quota systems, part-time sick leave, graded return to work and wage subsidy schemes. Anti-discrimination legislation is not effective at improving the employment prospects of people with disabilities. There is mixed evidence with respect to quota systems and wage subsidy schemes. However, the availability of part time sick leave or graded return to work are both consistently associated with improved work participation for people with disabilities.

OBJECTIVE: Corporate health programs (CHPs) aim to improve employees\' health through health promotion strategies at the workplace. Physical activity (PA) plays a crucial role in primary prevention, leading many companies to implement PA-based CHPs. However, there is limited examination in the scientific literature on whether PA-based CHPs (PA-CHPs) lead to economic benefits. This systematic review aimed to summarize the available literature on the economic aspects of PA-CHPs.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to identify studies focused on PA-CHPs targeting healthy sedentary workers and reporting at least one economic outcome, such as return on investment (ROI), costs, or sick leave.
RESULTS: Of 1036 studies identified by our search strategy, 11 studies involving 60 020 participants met the inclusion criteria. The mean (±SD) cost per capita for PA-CHPs was estimated as 359€ (±238€) (95% CI, 357-361€). In 75% of the studies, the net savings generated by PA-CHPs in 12 months were reported, with an average of 1095€ (±865€) (95% CI, 496-1690€). ROI was assessed in 50% of the included studies, with an average of 3.6 (±1.41) (95% CI, 2.19-5.01).
CONCLUSIONS: In addition to promoting a healthy lifestyle, PA-CHPs have the potential to generate significant economic returns. However, the heterogeneity among the existing studies highlights the need for standardization and accurate reporting of costs in future research.

UNASSIGNED: Little is known about the effects of routine mental health care on return-to-work (RTW) outcomes. This systematic review aimed to summarize and evaluate the effects of clinical representative psychotherapy on RTW among patients with a common mental disorder (CMD), treated within public mental health care.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and SveMED+. Primary outcomes were RTW, sick leave status, or self-reported work functioning. Studies limited to specific treatments and/or specific patient groups were excluded.
UNASSIGNED: Out of 1,422 records, only one article met the preregistered inclusion criteria. After broadening of criteria, a total of nine studies were included. Six were randomized controlled trials (RCT), two were register-based studies, and one was a quasi-experimental study. Descriptions of treatment duration and intensity of usual care were rarely specified but ranged from a few sessions to 3 years of psychotherapy. In the RCTs, two studies favored the intervention, one favored routine care, and three found no difference between conditions. Choice of outcomes differed greatly and included RTW rates (full or partial), number of days until RTW, change in sick leave status, and net days/months of work absence. Time points for outcome assessment also varied greatly from 3 months to 5 years after treatment.
UNASSIGNED: There is inconclusive evidence to establish to what extent routine mental healthcare is associated with improved RTW outcomes for patients with CMD. There is a need for more and better clinical trials and naturalistic studies detailing the content of routine treatment and its effect on RTW.
UNASSIGNED: This study was pre-registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022304967), https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022304967.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the intermethod agreement of self-reported vs. register data of \'sickness absence\' (SA) and \'return to work\' (RTW) outcome measurements.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and a meta-analysis of studies reporting mean differences (MDs) and sensitivity and specificity for self-report vs. register data and an inductive analysis of the self-report question formulations. An information specialist searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO for studies published from inception to November 2022. Screening and data extraction was done by two authors independently.
RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were included of which eighteen with an overall high risk of bias. Self-reports had a pooled MD of 1.84 SA days (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-3.41, I2 98%, 18 studies, 38,716 participants) compared to registries which varied among studies from 204 more to 17 days less. The median average sick leave in studies in the self-report group was 8 days (interquartile range 4-23 days). Being absent from work measured with self-report had a sensitivity of 0.83 (0.76-0.88 95% CI) and a specificity of 0.92 (0.88-0.94 95% CI) compared to registry data. The high heterogeneity amongst the studies could not be explained by recall time, gender, register type, prospective or retrospective self-reports, health problem, SA at baseline or risk of bias. Studies lacked standard outcome reporting, had unclearly formulated questions in self-reports and there was little information on the registers\' quality.
CONCLUSIONS: Current self-reports may differ from register-based absence data but in an inconsistent way. Due to inconsistency and high risk of bias the evidence is judged to be of very low certainty. Further research is needed to develop clear standard questions which can be used for SA and RTW self-reports. Quality of registers needs to be better evaluated. Percentage positive and negative agreement, MDs and 2 × 2 tables should be reported for studies investigating agreement between SA and RTW outcome measures.

Burnout is a work-related mental health problem that often causes long-term sickness absence. Return-to-work (RTW) interventions for burned-out sick-listed employees aim to prevent long-term work disability. This systematic review addresses two questions: (1) Which interventions for burned-out sick-listed employees have been studied?; (2) What is the effect of these interventions on RTW?We performed a systematic literature review and searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2022. We searched for articles of interventions for burned-out sick-listed employees. We conducted the review in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Outcome was RTW.We identified 2160 articles after removal of all duplicates. Eight studies met inclusion criteria. RTW outcomes were number of sick-leave days, sick-leave rates, median period of RTW and worked hours per week. Five studies described person-directed interventions, one described a workplace-directed intervention, one described a combination of both intervention types and one study described all three types of intervention. Only the workplace-directed intervention showed a significant improvement in RTW compared with the comparator group: at 18-month follow-up, 89% of the intervention group had returned to work compared with 73% of the comparator group.Only a limited number of studies have explored interventions specifically focused on burned-out sick-listed employees and the effect on RTW. Due to heterogeneity and moderate to high risk of bias of these studies, no firm conclusions can be drawn on the described interventions and their effect on RTW.The study was registered with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO, registration number: CRD42018089155).