Search

BACKGROUND: Although workplace injury rehabilitation is a significant economic and social burden for injured workers and the community, it remains inconclusive whether the worker's choice of provider and treatment type influences these costs or the outcome of rehabilitation. OBJECTIVE: This study explored what choices injured workers could access during rehabilitation in terms of their provider and treatment, what hindered or helped their choice, and whether workers perceived that choice influenced the outcome of their rehabilitation. METHODS: A mixed methods study was employed, utilising an online survey and semi-structured telephone interviews. RESULTS: Injured workers reported that being able to choose their provider and treatment was not straightforward. Obstacles included systemic rigidity, poor relationships between stakeholders, and unfamiliarity with the system. Most survey respondents perceived that the degree of choice they had in their treatment influenced the outcome of their rehabilitation and sometimes also their occupational bond, career, and finances. CONCLUSION: The study found that choice of provider and treatment type does matter for workers undergoing rehabilitation, impacting on outcomes including occupational bond, income, and disputes. In balancing the need for cost containment with social responsibility, both financial and psychosocial outcomes are relevant for those engaged in rehabilitation of injured workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: In the face of significant costs for injured worker rehabilitation and its impact on society, ongoing examination of how rehabilitation is carried out is warranted. OBJECTIVE: To review recent studies that explored the impact of the worker's choice in terms of provider and treatment on the outcome for the worker in injury rehabilitation. METHOD: A systematic literature review was conducted using searches through electronic databases, with studies retrieved then subjected to a quality appraisal. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were eligible for inclusion. Studies reviewed found that choice of provider or treatment generated more positive outcomes for workers, and workers preferred a treatment provider familiar with their care. The worker's ability to exercise choice was affected by conflict with other stakeholders and misalignment of expectations. The relationship between choice and costs was unclear, sometimes conflicting. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of treatment and provider choice on outcomes for workers remains unclear. The worker's ability to choose may be hampered by systemic constraints, access to preferred providers, misalignment of stakeholder expectations, and the worker's ability to engage in decision making. Greater worker engagement in their rehabilitation could potentially reduce costs as well as improve psychosocial outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]