Quality of work incapacity assessment in the Swiss disability insurance system

Clinician experiences assessing work disability related to mental disorders

Objective

Medical certification is one of the basic administrative mechanisms used by social policies aimed at income protection. The assessment of work disability is central to the income protection application. Yet, there is evidence suggesting that determining work disability related to mental disorders is challenging. Although essential to the disability application process, few studies have looked at physician and other clinician experiences with the process. However, this type of information is critical to developing processes to support providers who participate in the assessments. This purpose of this paper is to explore the experiences of physicians and other clinicians assessing public long-term work disability related to mental disorders.

Methods

This is an exploratory and descriptive study using qualitative methods. Clinician input was gathered through focus groups and individual in-depth interviews. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed to identify recurrent and significant themes that arose during the focus groups and individual interviews.

Results

Many of the experiences that the clinicians in this sample discussed related to the difficulty of trying to fill the roles of advocate and medical expert as well as the challenge of determining the impact of functional capacity and work ability. The findings also highlight the current gap in knowledge about the factors that affect successful functioning in general and at work in particular.

Conclusions

Given the challenges created by the current state of knowledge, it may be useful to consider a category of “partial disability”. In addition, the fact that work disability depends on the interaction between the experience of the mental disorder and specific job requirements and the fact that people applying for public long-term disability are not working, it might be helpful to offer a clear description and guidelines of the meaning of work ability.

Problems experienced by gynecologists/obstetricians in sickness certification consultations

OBJECTIVE

To explore frequencies and experiences with problems in sickness certification consultations among gynecologists and obstetricians in two different years.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional surveys on two occasions; in 2004 and 2008.

SETTING

Gynecological, obstetric and maternal health care.

SAMPLE

Physicians working in gynecology, obstetrics or maternal health care in two Swedish counties from two samples: in 2004 (n = 315), and in 2008 (n = 327).

METHODS

Data regarding sickness certification consultations were obtained from comprehensive questionnaires that had been mailed to the physicians in two Swedish counties in 2004 and in 2008, respectively.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Frequencies and types of problems in sickness certification consultations, organizational support, and need to acquire more competence.

RESULTS

The majority experienced that patients requested to be on sick leave for a reason other than work incapacity due to disease or injury, at least a few times per year (85% in 2004 and 88% in 2008). The most problematic situation to handle was when the physician and the patient had different opinions about the need for sick leave (2004: 66% and 2008: 58%). The physicians expressed a need for more competence about the options and responsibilities of employers, social insurance officers and physicians in sickness certification cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Most gynecologists/obstetricians find sickness certification consultations problematic and especially when encountering patients requesting to be on sick leave for reasons other than disease. The physicians expressed a need for more competence in insurance medicine, especially about their own and other stakeholders' options and responsibilities.

Quality of medical certificates issued in long-term sick leave or disability in relation to patient characteristics and delivery of health care

AIM

To assess the quality of medical certificates issued during long-term sick leave or disability.

METHODS

We collected a stratified randomised sample of 250 medical certificates issued for assessment of work capacity: Certificates issued in primary health care (PHC) with a locomotor, psychiatric or other main diagnosis, in psychiatric care, and in other secondary care. Four experts performed a quality assessment per section of the certificate and globally.

RESULTS

The certificates varied from short notes to extensive documents. Those issued in PHC included more diagnoses per certificate (p < 0.0001) than in secondary care. PHC physicians had a longer professional relationship to their patients (p = 0.009). Information on work capacity was entirely adequate and relevant in only 10% of the certificates. Disturbed mental function was indicated in 60% of the certificates without psychiatric main diagnosis. Whether indicated medical state influenced functional state was not assessable in 46 (19 %) of the certificates due to lack of information. Similarly, if reduced function influenced working capacity was not assessable in 66 (27 %) of the certificates. The global quality differed (p < 0.0001) between certificates issued in primary care 5.7 (CI 5.5-5.9) and secondary care 6.9 (CI 6.5-7.3).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for improvement of the quality of medical certificates issued in cases of long-term sick leave or disability. The quality of medical certificates was low and lacked necessary information requested by the Social Insurance Agency. The quality was lower in certificates issued in primary care, which might be explained by a different case-mix.

Sickness certification as a complex professional and collaborative activity--a qualitative study

Background

Physicians have an important but problematic task to issue sickness certifications. A manifold of studies have identified a wide spectrum of medical and insurance-related problems in sickness certification. Despite educational efforts aiming to improve physicians’ knowledge of social insurance medicine there are no signs of reduction of these problems. We hypothesised that the quality deficits is not only due to lack of knowledge among issuing physicians. The aim of the study was to explore physicians’ challenges when handling sickness certification in relation to their professional roles as physicians and to their interaction with different stakeholders.

Methods

One hundred seventy-seven physicians in Stockholm County, Sweden, participated in a sick-listing audit program. Participants identified challenges in handling sick-leave issues and formulated action plans for improvement. Challenges and responsible stakeholders were identified in the action plans. To deepen the understanding facilitators of the program were interviewed. A qualitative content analysis was performed exploring challenge categories and categories of stakeholders with responsibility to initiate actions to improve the quality of the sick-listing process. The challenge categories were then related by their content to professional competence roles in accord with the Canadian Medical Education Directions for Specialists (CanMEDS) framework and to the stakeholder categories.

Results

Seven categories of challenges were identified. Practitioner patient interaction, Work capacity assessment, Interaction with the Social Insurance Administration, The patient’s workplace and the labour market, Sick-listing practice, Collaboration and resource allocation within the Health Care System, Leadership and routines at the Health Care Unit. The challenges were related to all seven CanMEDS roles. Five categories of stakeholders were identified and several stakeholders were involved in each challenge category.

Conclusions

Physicians performing sickness certification tasks experience a complex variety of challenges. From physician perspective actions to handle these need to be initiated in interaction with both medical and non-medical stakeholders. The relation between the challenges and a well-established professional competence framework revealed a complex pattern. Thus, from a public health perspective, educational activities aimed to improve the sick-listing process should address all physician competences including identification and interaction with stakeholders, and not just knowledge of social insurance medicine.

Concession of sickness benefit to social security beneficiaries due to mental disorders

OBJECTIVE

Assess the odds of having an initial claim for statutory sickness benefit awarded (ascribed to mental disorder as the main registered diagnosis), in relation to institutional, clinical, sociodemographic and welfare factors in Juiz de Fora-MG, Brazil.

METHOD

Two models of logistic regression, taking into account the categories of the medical examiners, were built with the aim of characterizing the relative weight of several variables affecting the medical conclusion.

RESULTS

The factors more strongly related to an award of benefit were claimants assessed by a physician without a specialization in psychiatry; with a diagnosis of psychosis; up to 29 years of age; with other non-psychiatric (musculoskeletal and cardiovascular) co-morbidities; registered with the national insurance system as employed; and male.

DISCUSSION

In both models, examiners with a specialization in psychiatry were associated with a lower likelihood of award of benefit. This suggests that examinations undertaken by doctors having a specialty related to the diagnosis supporting the sickness benefit claim are stricter than those undertaken by non-specialists.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that benefit award odds were associated with the specialty of the examiner, medical diagnosis, age, gender and claimant category.

Sickness-certification practice in different clinical settings; a survey of all physicians in a country

BACKGROUND

How physicians handle sickness-certification is essential in the sickness-absence process. Few studies have focused this task of physicians' daily work. Most previous studies have only included general practitioners. However, a previous study indicated that this is a common task also among other physicians. The aim of this study was to gain detailed knowledge about physicians' work with sickness-certification and of the problems they experience in this work.

METHODS

A comprehensive questionnaire regarding sickness-certification practice was sent home to all physicians living and working in Sweden (N = 36,898; response rate: 61%). This study included physicians aged <65 years who had sickness-certification consultations at least a few times a year (n = 14,210). Descriptive statistics were calculated and odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for having different types of related problems, stratified on clinical settings, using physicians working in internal medicine as reference group.

RESULTS

Sickness-certification consultations were frequent; 67% of all physicians had such, and of those, 83% had that at least once a week. The proportion who had such consultations >5 times a week varied between clinical settings; from 3% in dermatology to 79% in orthopaedics; and was 43% in primary health care. The OR for finding sickness-certification tasks problematic was highest among the physicians working in primary health care (OR 3.3; CI 2.9-3.7) and rheumatology clinics (OR 2.6; CI 1.9-3.5). About 60% found it problematic to assess patients' work capacity and to provide a prognosis regarding the duration of work incapacity.

CONCLUSIONS

So far, most interventions regarding physicians' sickness-certification practices have been targeted towards primary health care and general practitioners. Our results indicate that the ORs for finding these tasks problematic were highest in primary health care. Nevertheless, physicians in some other clinical settings more often have such consultations and many of them also find these tasks problematic, e.g. in rheumatology, neurology, psychiatry, and orthopaedic clinics. Thus, the results indicate that much can be gained through focusing on physicians in other types of clinics as well, when planning interventions to improve sickness-certification practice.

Verifiability of diagnostic categories and work ability in the context of disability pension award: a survey on "gatekeeping" among general practitioners in Norway

Background

Disability benefits exist to redeem social and financial consequences of reduced work ability from medical conditions. Physicians are responsible for identifying the medical grounds for benefit claims. The aim of this study was to explore physicians' views on verifiability of medical conditions and related work ability in this context.

Methods

Information on verifiability of diagnostic categories and work ability was obtained from a survey among a representative sample of general practitioners (GPs) in Norway (n = 500, 25.2% response rate). Verifiability was defined as to what extent the assessment is based on objective criteria versus on information from the patient. We enquired about the diagnostic categories used in official statistics on main disability benefit causes in Norway and elsewhere.

Results

On a scale from 0 (low verifiability) to 5 (high verifiability), the mean level of verifiability across all diagnostic categories was 3.7 (SD = 0.42). Degree of verifiability varied much between diagnostic categories, and was low in e.g. unspecified rheumatism/myalgia and dorsopathies, and high in neoplasms and congenital malformations, deformation and chromosomal abnormalities. Verifiability of work ability was reported to be more problematic than that of diagnostic categories. The diagnostic categories rated as the least verifiable, are also the most common in disability pension awards.

Conclusion

Verifiability of both diagnostic categories and work ability in disability assessments are reported to be moderate by GPs. We suggest that the low verifiability of diagnostic categories and related work ability assessments in the majority of disability pension awards is important in explaining why GPs find the gatekeeping-function problematic.

New rules meet established sickness certification practice: a focus-group study on the introduction of functional assessments in Norwegian primary care

OBJECTIVE

To explore how general practitioners view and handle new standards for functional assessments in sickness certification practice.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using focus group interviews. Data were analysed according to Giorgi's phenomenological approach and supported by theories on knowledge.

SETTING

General practitioners from three neighbouring counties in Norway.

SUBJECTS

Four focus groups with a total of 23 participants were recruited through the Norwegian Medical Association and its Continuous Medical Education system.

RESULTS

The participants reported difficulties and reluctance to act in accordance with new functional assessment demands on both a practical and a conceptual level. In established sickness certification practice functional assessment was described as an unspoken part of the medical examination. After the introduction of formal, written functional assessments they identified problems of terminology, communication, and trust. Strategies were developed to circumvent these problems.

CONCLUSIONS

A gap was noticeable between the participants' established practice and the new standards' demand for a more theoretical and communicative functional assessment. The general lack of training, being confronted with new terminology, and increasingly high pressure to reduce sickness absences create an atmosphere of insecurity when assessing function.

Patient, clinician, and general practice factors in long-term certified sickness

AIMS

To investigate the association of patient, clinician, and general practice factors with long-term certified sickness absence.

METHODS

Analysis of a sickness certification database constructed via the use of carbonized sick notes by clinicians at nine general practices in the north-west of England. A total of 3,385 patient sickness episodes certified by 44 general practitioners (GPs) were included in the analysis. Three logistic regression models were constructed in order to estimate independent effects of the patient, GP, and the general practice on risk of long-term (>28 weeks) incapacity.

RESULTS

The logistic regression models explained a maximum of 27% of the variation in long-term certified sickness. The diagnostic reason for the sickness episode explained over 18% of variance, while clinician and general practice effects explained only 3.4% and 2.3% respectively. In all models, older patient age and an episode within the mild mental disorder (MMD) diagnostic category significantly increased the risk of long-term work incapacity.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results imply that, rather than basing 'return to work' interventions on identification of individual patient/claimant characteristics or on GP training initiatives, it may be more productive to focus upon a more diagnosis-based approach within primary care itself. Interventions aiming to reduce mild mental disorder-related work incapacity should be given priority.

Sickness certificates as a basis for decisions regarding entitlement to sickness insurance benefits

BACKGROUND

The sickness certificate is a major instrument for establishing contact and conveying information between two authorities that have a substantial impact on the life situation and work situation of the patients, as well as on the economic costs of the society.

AIM

A study was undertaken to assess the quality of physicians' sickness certificates as a basis for social insurance officers' decisions regarding entitlement to sickness benefits.

METHOD

Information on all 2,449 sickness certificates for sick-leave periods exceeding 28 days' sick leave period received at the social insurance offices in one Swedish county during one week in 2002 was coded and analysed.

RESULTS

Information provided in the certificates was often not sufficient to allow social insurance officers to determine eligibility for sickness benefits. Qualitative analyses of certificates from general practitioners (GPs) revealed that 21% contained ambiguous statements about the medical disorder, 30% were unclear regarding the assessment of functional capacity, and 22% required additional information on both those aspects. Sickness certificates issued by GPs and physicians under specialist training, as compared with other categories of physicians, more often provided essential data, for example concerning the patient's occupational tasks and type of employment.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians often fail to contribute required information concerning functional capacity and other important aspects when issuing sickness certificates. This limits the use of these documents as a basis for decisions regarding sickness insurance benefits. The practical consequences of incomplete certificates might be delayed payment of benefits and delayed initiation of return to work measures.

Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU). Chapter 11. Physicians' sick-listing practices

Physicians' sick-listing practices have been studied to a very limited extent. There is limited scientific evidence that physicians perceive sick-listing duties to be difficult and problematic, regarding both the medical and the insurance-related aspects. There is limited scientific evidence also that quality is often deficient in the sickness certificates issued by physicians. This may affect case management at the local insurance office. There is insufficient scientific evidence to explain the differences in physicians' sick-listing patterns. The effects on patients are also insufficiently studied.