Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 May;64(5):304-12.
doi: 10.1136/oem.2006.029397. Epub 2006 Nov 9.

Criteria and methods used for the assessment of fitness for work: a systematic review

Affiliations

Criteria and methods used for the assessment of fitness for work: a systematic review

Consol Serra et al. Occup Environ Med. 2007 May.

Abstract

The main findings from reports published in scientific journals on the criteria and methods used to assess fitness for work were reviewed. Systematic searches were made using internet engine searches (1966-2005) with related keywords. 39 reports were identified, mostly from the US and western Europe. Assessment of fitness for work is defined by most as the evaluation of a worker's capacity to work without risk to their own or others' health and safety. It is mainly assessed at recruitment (pre-offer or post-offer), and when changes of work or health conditions occur. Five main criteria used by occupational doctors to evaluate fitness for work were identified: the determination of worker's capacity and worker's risk in relation to his or her workplace, as well as ethical, economic and legal criteria. Most authors agreed that assessment tools used need to be specific and cost-effective, and probably none gives unequivocal answers. Outcomes from fitness for work assessments range from "fit" to "unfit", with other possible intermediate categories such as "fit subject to work modifications", "fit with restrictions" or "conditionally fit (temporarily, permanently)". Workplace modifications to improve or adjust working conditions must always be considered. There is confusion about the decision-making process to be used to judge about fitness for work. There is very scarce scientific evidence based on empirical data, probably because there are no standard or valid methodologies for all professions and circumstances.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

References

    1. International Labour Office Technical and ethical guidelines for workers' health surveillance (Occupational Safety and Health Series No. 72). Geneva: International Labour Office, 199821
    1. Cox R A F, Edwards F C, Palmer K.Fitness for work. The medical aspects. 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, 2000
    1. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 1992. http://www.ada.gov
    1. Real Decreto Legislativo 5/2000. de 4 de Agosto por el que se aprueba el texto refundido de la Ley sobre Infracciones y Sanciones en el Orden Social. BOE no 189, de 8 de Agosto de 2000
    1. Wahsltröm R, Alexanderson K. Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU). Chapter 11. doctors' sick‐listing practices. Scand J Public Health Suppl 200463222–255. - PubMed

Publication types