Comparison of two measures of work functioning in a population of claimants with physical and psychological injuries

Comparison of two measures of work functioning in a population of claimants with physical and... Research has focused on advancing our understanding of strategies to improve return to work outcomes following a physical injury. There has been limited research on the different types of supports needed for workers returning to work following a psychological injury. Developing a better understanding of work limitations when people are back at work is a key step in the development of strategies in this area. Unfortunately, measurement tools have been established separately by injury type, limiting research opportunities to compare differences in work limitations. In this article, we compare two measures of work functioning in a population of claimants that have returned to work following a musculoskeletal or psychological injury: a modified version of the Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) developed for workers with physical injuries and the Lam Employed Absence Productivity Scale (LEAPS) developed for workers with mental health claims. A telephone questionnaire was administered to 214 claimants who returned to work following a claim for a psychological injury or a musculoskeletal injury. While the modified WLQ detected differences in work limitations by injury type, there were no significant differences in levels of work functioning detected by the LEAPS. The comparison demonstrated the value of including questions about work limitations that go beyond mental and interpersonal demands for claimants with psychological injuries; however, there is also a need to limit questions about physical constraints. A modified version of the WLQ is recommended to further our understandings of the similarities and differences in the experiences of workers with psychological versus physical injuries. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quality & Quantity Springer Journals

Comparison of two measures of work functioning in a population of claimants with physical and psychological injuries

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/comparison-of-two-measures-of-work-functioning-in-a-population-of-VFeMjb8S7R
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Subject
Social Sciences; Methodology of the Social Sciences; Social Sciences, general
ISSN
0033-5177
eISSN
1573-7845
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11135-016-0313-6
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Research has focused on advancing our understanding of strategies to improve return to work outcomes following a physical injury. There has been limited research on the different types of supports needed for workers returning to work following a psychological injury. Developing a better understanding of work limitations when people are back at work is a key step in the development of strategies in this area. Unfortunately, measurement tools have been established separately by injury type, limiting research opportunities to compare differences in work limitations. In this article, we compare two measures of work functioning in a population of claimants that have returned to work following a musculoskeletal or psychological injury: a modified version of the Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) developed for workers with physical injuries and the Lam Employed Absence Productivity Scale (LEAPS) developed for workers with mental health claims. A telephone questionnaire was administered to 214 claimants who returned to work following a claim for a psychological injury or a musculoskeletal injury. While the modified WLQ detected differences in work limitations by injury type, there were no significant differences in levels of work functioning detected by the LEAPS. The comparison demonstrated the value of including questions about work limitations that go beyond mental and interpersonal demands for claimants with psychological injuries; however, there is also a need to limit questions about physical constraints. A modified version of the WLQ is recommended to further our understandings of the similarities and differences in the experiences of workers with psychological versus physical injuries.

Journal

Quality & QuantitySpringer Journals

Published: Feb 2, 2016

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off