Development of return to work management model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14456/dcj.2018.39Keywords:
return to work, hospital, workplaceAbstract
This participatory action research aimed to develop the return to work management model linking between health care providers and workplaces. The study was conducted during July 2015- August 2016 in 8 hospitals and it was divided into three phases including Phase I: situation analysis of return to work interventions done by health care providers; Phase II: tool and RTW management model development; and Phase III: conclusions. Results showed that in the past most physicians had only given a doctor certificate to the sick/injured factory employees who were absent from work but had not worked with the workplaces on the recommendations or decisions regarding potential change of job title or working conditions of the returning employees, while on the part of health facilities a hospital executive committee had made the decision regarding the change of job title among sick/injured health workers. RTW interventions were implemented in three of eight hospitals with different figures and there was insufficient involvement of the workplaces. Six RTW forms including RTW01-RTW06 were developed by the staff of participating hospitals and workplaces, tried out in eight hospitals, and revised and refined until they were found suitable for actual work environments. The model of RTW management was also developed and it was comprised of two parts. The first part specifically addressed a hospital-based RTW intervention and the second part was intended to focus on a workplace-based RTW intervention. The key components of RTW management model included the criteria for patient inclusion into the program, the communications between occupational physicians and treating physicians, the coordination between health care providers and the workplaces, and the provision of modified work/position descriptions for sick or injured workers. Modified work/position descriptions is defined as either a modification of the original job to reduce physical loads, reduced hours or the transfer of the recovering worker to a less demanding job. Among eight participating hospitals, all of them could successfully perform RTW interventions according to the RTW forms and model provision. These hospitals, however, modified the model to suit their actual work settings. Finally, the roles of workplace to implement RTW interventions were quantified. The number of patients included in the RTW program has increased as well. Staff of participating hospitals and workplaces were found to have actively contributed to all phases of the study, including idea formulation, RTW form and model development and implementation. It is recommended that private hospitals be considered for inclusion and participation in the model for future development because most workers insured under the Social Security Scheme (SSS) choose private hospitals to access health services. Additionally, related agencies under the Ministry of Labour should support the workplaces to implement the RTW program in compliance with the applicable laws, as well as working closely together with health care providers.
Downloads
References
2. สำนักงานกองทุนเงินทดแทน สำนักงานประกันสังคม. รายงานประจำปี 2559 [อินเทอร์เน็ต]. [สืบค้นเมื่อ 15 ต.ค. 2560]. แหล่งข้อมูล: http://www.sso.go.th/wpr/uploads/ uploadImages/file/ AnnualReportBook2559.pdf
3. Loisel P, Lemaire J, Poitras S, Durand M, Champagne F, Stock S, et al. Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis of a disability prevention model for back pain management: a six year follow up study. Occup Environ Med 2002;59:807-15.
4. กระทรวงแรงงาน. กฎกระทรวง กำหนดหลักเกณฑ์และวิธีการตรวจสุขภาพของลูกจ้าง และส่งผลการตรวจแก่พนักงานตรวจแรงงาน พ.ศ. 2547. ราชกิจจานุเบกษา เล่ม 122, ตอนที่ 4 ก. (ลงวันที่ 29 ธันวาคม 2547).
5. Franche RL, Baril R, Shaw W, Nicholas M, Loisel P. Workplace-based return-to-work interventions: optimizing the role of stakeholders in implementation and research. J Occup Rehabil 2005;15:525-42.
6. สำนักโรคจากการประกอบอาชีพและสิ่งแวดล้อม. ผลการดำเนินงานโครงการสถานประกอบการปลอดโรค ปลอดภัย กายใจเป็นสุข 2560. นนทบุรี: สำนักโรคจากการประกอบอาชีพและสิ่งแวดล้อม; 2560.
7. Enform Canada. Return to work programs development guidelines [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2015 Jul 16]. Available from: http://www.enform.ca/resources/detail/8/return-to-work-program-development-guideline
8. Crawford P. Return to work: works for you and your employees [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2015 Jul 16]. Available from: http://www.tdi.texas.gov/wc/rtw/documents/rtwguide.pdf
9. Work Cover, New South Wales. Guidelines for workplace return to work programs [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2015 Jul 20]. Available from: https://www.sira.nsw.gov.au/ resources-library/workers-compensation-resources/publications/help-with-getting-people-back-to-work/guidelines-for-workplace-return-to-work-programs
10. วิวัฒน์ เอกบูรณะวัฒน์. การดูแลผู้ป่วยกลับเข้าทำงาน. พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 2. ชลบุรี: มูลนิธิสัมมาอาชีวะ; 2559.
11. Anema J, van Der Giezen A, Buijs P, van Mechelen W. Ineffective disability management by doctors is an obstacle for return-to-work: a cohort study on low back pain patients sicklisted for 3–4 months. Occup Environ Med 2002;59:729-33.
12. MacEachen E, Clarke J, Franche RL, Irvin E. Systematic review of the qualitative literature on return to work after injury. Scand J Work Environ Health 2006;32:257-69.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles published in the Disease Control Journal are considered as academic work, research or analysis of the personal opinion of the authors, not the opinion of the Thailand Department of Disease Control or editorial team. The authors must be responsible for their articles.