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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Sep;26(3):319-31.
doi: 10.1007/s10926-015-9615-0.

Work Incapacity and Treatment Costs After Severe Accidents: Standard Versus Intensive Case Management in a 6-Year Randomized Controlled Trial

Stefan M Scholz  1 , Peter Andermatt  2 , Benno L Tobler  2 , Dieter Spinnler  2
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Work Incapacity and Treatment Costs After Severe Accidents: Standard Versus Intensive Case Management in a 6-Year Randomized Controlled Trial

Stefan M Scholz et al. J Occup Rehabil. 2016 Sep.

Abstract

Purpose Case management is widely accepted as an effective method to support medical rehabilitation and vocational reintegration of accident victims with musculoskeletal injuries. This study investigates whether more intensive case management improves outcomes such as work incapacity and treatment costs for severely injured patients. Methods 8,050 patients were randomly allocated either to standard case management (SCM, administered by claims specialists) or intensive case management (ICM, administered by case managers). These study groups differ mainly by caseload, which was approximately 100 cases in SCM and 35 in ICM. The setting is equivalent to a prospective randomized controlled trial. A 6-year follow-up period was chosen in order to encompass both short-term insurance benefits and permanent disability costs. All data were extracted from administrative insurance databases. Results Average work incapacity over the 6-year follow-up, including contributions from daily allowances and permanent losses from disability, was slightly but insignificantly higher under ICM than under SCM (21.6 vs. 21.3 % of pre-accident work capacity). Remaining work incapacity after 6 years of follow-up showed no difference between ICM and SCM (8.9 vs. 8.8 % of pre-accident work incapacity). Treatment costs were 43,500 Swiss Francs (CHF) in ICM compared to 39,800 in SCM (+9.4 %, p = 0.01). The number of care providers involved in ICM was 10.5 compared to 10.0 in ICM (+5.0 %, p < 0.001). Conclusions Contrary to expectations, ICM did not reduce work incapacity as compared to SCM, but did increase healthcare consumption and treatment costs. It is concluded that the intensity of case management alone is not sufficient to improve rehabilitation and vocational reintegration of accident victims.

Keywords: Accident; Case management; Insurance; Return to work; Treatment costs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Participant flow with absolute (N) and weighted (W) number of cases. SCM standard case management, ICM intensive case management
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Work incapacity (WI) at the end of each follow-up year as a percentage of pre-accident work capacity. Contributions from permanent WI (permanent disability pensions and fatalities) and temporary WI (indemnified by daily allowances) are shown. AWI denotes daily work incapacity integrated over the entire 6-year follow-up period. SCM standard case management, ICM intensive case management
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Treatment costs, accumulated from the date of registration of each case until the end of each follow-up year. Error bars are standard errors. SCM standard case management, ICM intensive case management
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Waddell G. Preventing incapacity in people with musculoskeletal disorders. Br Med Bull. 2006;77-78:55–69. doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldl008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Briand C, Durand MJ, St-Arnaud L, Corbière M. Work and mental health: learning from return-to-work rehabilitation programs designed for workers with musculoskeletal disorders. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2007;30:444–457. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2007.06.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. MacEachen E, Clarke J, Franche RL, Irvin E. Systematic review of the qualitative literature on return to work after injury. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2006;32(4):257–269. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.1009. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Krause N, Frank JW, Dasinger LK, Sullivan TJ, Sinclair SJ. Determinants of duration of disability and return-to-work after work-related injury and illness: challenges for future research. Am J Ind Med. 2001;40:464–484. doi: 10.1002/ajim.1116. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Turner JA, Franklin G, Fulton-Kehoe D, Sheppard L, Stover B, Wu R, Gluck JV, Wickizer TM. ISSLS prize winner: early predictors of chronic work disability. Spine. 2008;33(25):2809–2818. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817df7a7. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources