Obstetricians/Gynecologists' Problems in Sickness Certification Consultations: Two Nationwide Surveys

Clinical Work-Integrating Care in Current Practice: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Clinical work-integrating care (CWIC) refers to paying attention to work participation in a clinical setting. Working patients may benefit from CWIC. The purpose of this study is to explore the extent and nature to which medical specialists provide CWIC and what policies and guidelines oblige or recommend specialists to do.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psychinfo, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for studies on the extent and nature of CWIC and supplemented by gray literature on policies and guidelines. Six main categories were defined a priori. Applying a meta-aggregative approach, subcategories were subsequently defined using qualitative data. Next, quantitative findings were integrated into these subcategories. A separate narrative of policies and guidelines using the same main categories was constructed.

RESULTS

In total, 70 studies and 55 gray literature documents were included. The main findings per category were as follows: (1) collecting data on the occupation of patients varied widely; (2) most specialists did not routinely discuss work, but recent studies showed an increasing tendency to do so, which corresponds to recent policies and guidelines; (3) work-related advice ranged from general advice to patient-physician collaboration about work-related decisions; (4) CWIC was driven by legislation in many countries; (5) specialists sometimes collaborated in multidisciplinary teams to provide CWIC; and (6) medical guidelines regarding CWIC were generally not available.

CONCLUSION

Medical specialists provide a wide variety of CWIC ranging from assessing a patient's occupation to extensive collaboration with patients and other professionals to support work participation. Lack of medical guidelines could explain the variety of these practices.

Current practices, needs, and expectations of discussing work with a medical specialist from a patient's perspective: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

Attention to paid work in clinical health care-clinical work-integrating care (CWIC)-might be beneficial for patients of working age. However, the perceptions and expectations of patients about CWIC are unknown. The aim of this study was to develop an understanding of current practices, needs, and expectations among patients for discussing work with a medical specialist.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A qualitative study was undertaken involving patients with diverse medical conditions (n = 33). Eight online synchronous focus groups were held. A thematic analysis was then performed.

RESULTS

Three themes emerged from the data: (1) the process of becoming a patient while wanting to work again, (2) different needs for different patients, (3) patients' expectations of CWIC. We identified three different overarching categories of work-concerns: (a) the impact of work on disease, (b) the impact of disease or treatment on work ability, and (c) concerns when work ability remained decreased. For each category of concerns, patients expected medical specialists to perform differing roles.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients indicated that they need support for work-related concerns from their medical specialists and/or other professionals. Currently, not all work concerns received the requested attention, leaving a portion of the patients with unmet needs regarding CWIC.

Physician's use of sickness certification guidelines: a nationwide survey of 13 750 physicians in different types of clinics in Sweden

OBJECTIVES

To explore physicians' experiences of using the national sickness certification guidelines introduced in 2007 and the types of information they used, in general and in different types of clinics.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Most physicians working in Sweden in 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

A questionnaire was sent to 34 718 physicians; 54% responded. Analyses were based on answers from the 13 750 physicians who had sick leave cases.

OUTCOME MEASURES

To what extent the guidelines were used and what type of information from them that was used.

RESULTS

Ten years after the sickness certification guidelines were introduced in Sweden, half of the physicians used them at least once a month. About 40% of physicians in primary healthcare and occupational health services used the guidelines every week. The type of information used varied; 53% used recommendations about duration and 29% about degree of sick leave. Using information about function and activity/work capacity, respectively, was more common within primary healthcare (37% and 38%), psychiatry (42% and 42%), and occupational health services (35% and 41%), and less common in surgery and orthopaedic clinics (12% and 12%) who more often used information about duration (48% and 53%). Moreover, 10% stated that the guidelines were very, and 24% fairly problematic to apply. Half (47%) stated that the guidelines facilitated their contacts with patients and 29% that they improved quality in their management of sick leave cases. More non-specialists, compared with specialists, found that the guidelines facilitated contacts with patients (OR 3.28, 95% CI 3.04 to 3.55).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of the physicians used the sickness certification guidelines, although this varied with type of clinic. Half stated that the guidelines facilitated patient contacts. Yet, some found it problematic to apply the guidelines. Further development of the guidelines is warranted as well as more knowledge about them among physicians.

Oncologists' experiences of and prerequisites for sickness certification tasks: A nationwide questionnaire study

Oncologists frequently have sickness certification (SC) consultations, however, little is known about their experiences of such tasks.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate oncologists' experiences of organisational prerequisites for SC tasks, and if lack of resources was related to experiencing SC as problematic.

METHOD

Questionnaire data from 342 oncologists in Sweden were used for descriptive statistics and to calculate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

The majority (92.2%) had SC consultations weekly; 17.8% of the oncologists experienced such consultations as problematic weekly. About a third appreciated the national guidelines for SC (34.5%) and had joint routines/policies regarding SC at their clinic (29.7%). Experiencing SC consultations as problematic was associated with stating not having enough resources for such work (OR 3.47; 95% CI 1.92-6.25). Lack of resources was associated with: experiencing lack of competence in insurance medicine (3.34; 1.92-5.82), conflicts with patients regarding SC (4.22; 1.96-9.07), finding it problematic to manage the two roles as medical expert and as the patient's treating physician (3.31; 2.04-5.34), or to assess work capacity (2.28; 1.46-3.56).

CONCLUSION

Although oncologists often had SC tasks, most did not experience them as problematic weekly. However, lack of resources for SC tasks was associated with experiencing SC as problematic.

Implementation of maternity protection legislation: Gynecologists' perceptions and practices in French-speaking Switzerland

Background

In several countries, maternity protection legislations (MPL) confer an essential role to gynecologist-obstetricians (OBGYNs) for the protection of pregnant workers and their future children from occupational exposures. This study explores OBGYNs’ practices and difficulties in implementing MPL in the French-speaking part of Switzerland.

Methods

An online survey was sent to 333 OBGYNs. Data analysis included: 1) descriptive and correlational statistics and 2) hierarchical cluster analysis to identify patterns of practices.

Results

OBGYNs evoked several problems in MPL implementation: absence of risk analysis in the companies, difficult collaboration with employers, lack of competencies in the field of occupational health. Preventive leave was underused, with sick leave being prescribed instead. Training had a positive effect on OBGYNs’ knowledge and implementation of MPL. Hierarchical cluster analysis highlighted three main types of practices: 1) practice in line with legislation; 2) practice on a case-by-case basis; 3) limited practice. OBGYNs with good knowledge of MPL more consistently applied its provisions.

Conclusion

The implementation of MPL appears challenging for OBGYNs. Collaboration with occupational physicians and training might help OBGYNs to better take on their role in maternity protection. MPL in itself could be improved.