Physicians' assessments of work capacity in patients with SHC: comparison between five European countries

S L Merkus, K H N Weerdesteijn, F G Schaafsma, S Maeland, M Jourdain, J P Canévet, C Rat, J R Anema, E L Werner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Comparing assessments of incapacity to work in patients with subjective health complaints (SHC) by physicians from 5 different European countries.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.

METHOD: General practitioners from Norway (n=56), Sweden (n=29), Denmark (n=41), France (n=46) and occupational and insurance physicians from the Netherlands (n=93) watched and assessed incapacity to work in nine video vignettes of patients with SHC. We subsequently analysed differences between assessments (whether or not there was incapacity to work) by country, with Norway as a reference, as well as differences between general practitioners from the four countries and occupational and insurance physicians using a generalised linear mixed model.

RESULTS: Assessments of incapacity to work by physicians from the 5 countries were generally very similar. However, compared to Norwegian general practitioners, Swedish general practitioners (odds ratio (OR) of 0.43 with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.23-0.79) and Dutch occupational and insurance physicians (OR of 0.55 with 95% CI of 0.36-0.86) concluded less often that the patients in the videos were unable to work. There were no differences between general practitioners from the other 2 European countries and those from Norway. The Dutch occupational and insurance physicians also concluded less often that there was an incapacity to work compared to all general practitioners from the other 4 European countries (OR of 0.67 with 95% CI of 0.49-0.93).

CONCLUSION: There are significant differences between assessments of incapacity to work in patients with SHC between countries and professional groups, but these differences are generally small. Potential explanations for these differences could be found in occupational and insurance medicine specialist training and in the existence of professional guidelines.

Translated title of the contributionPhysicians' assessments of work capacity in patients with SHC: comparison between five European countries
Original languageDutch
Pages (from-to)D1163
JournalNederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde
Volume161
Issue number0
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Cite this

Merkus, S. L., Weerdesteijn, K. H. N., Schaafsma, F. G., Maeland, S., Jourdain, M., Canévet, J. P., ... Werner, E. L. (2017). Beoordeling van arbeidsongeschiktheid bij SOLK. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde, 161(0), D1163.
Merkus, S L ; Weerdesteijn, K H N ; Schaafsma, F G ; Maeland, S ; Jourdain, M ; Canévet, J P ; Rat, C ; Anema, J R ; Werner, E L. / Beoordeling van arbeidsongeschiktheid bij SOLK. In: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde. 2017 ; Vol. 161, No. 0. pp. D1163.
@article{c578bc315f584b1c8e945f6e1d96b4a3,
title = "Beoordeling van arbeidsongeschiktheid bij SOLK",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Comparing assessments of incapacity to work in patients with subjective health complaints (SHC) by physicians from 5 different European countries.DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.METHOD: General practitioners from Norway (n=56), Sweden (n=29), Denmark (n=41), France (n=46) and occupational and insurance physicians from the Netherlands (n=93) watched and assessed incapacity to work in nine video vignettes of patients with SHC. We subsequently analysed differences between assessments (whether or not there was incapacity to work) by country, with Norway as a reference, as well as differences between general practitioners from the four countries and occupational and insurance physicians using a generalised linear mixed model.RESULTS: Assessments of incapacity to work by physicians from the 5 countries were generally very similar. However, compared to Norwegian general practitioners, Swedish general practitioners (odds ratio (OR) of 0.43 with 95{\%} confidence interval (CI) of 0.23-0.79) and Dutch occupational and insurance physicians (OR of 0.55 with 95{\%} CI of 0.36-0.86) concluded less often that the patients in the videos were unable to work. There were no differences between general practitioners from the other 2 European countries and those from Norway. The Dutch occupational and insurance physicians also concluded less often that there was an incapacity to work compared to all general practitioners from the other 4 European countries (OR of 0.67 with 95{\%} CI of 0.49-0.93).CONCLUSION: There are significant differences between assessments of incapacity to work in patients with SHC between countries and professional groups, but these differences are generally small. Potential explanations for these differences could be found in occupational and insurance medicine specialist training and in the existence of professional guidelines.",
keywords = "English Abstract, Journal Article",
author = "Merkus, {S L} and Weerdesteijn, {K H N} and Schaafsma, {F G} and S Maeland and M Jourdain and Can{\'e}vet, {J P} and C Rat and Anema, {J R} and Werner, {E L}",
year = "2017",
language = "Dutch",
volume = "161",
pages = "D1163",
journal = "Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde",
issn = "0028-2162",
publisher = "Bohn Stafleu van Loghum",
number = "0",

}

Merkus, SL, Weerdesteijn, KHN, Schaafsma, FG, Maeland, S, Jourdain, M, Canévet, JP, Rat, C, Anema, JR & Werner, EL 2017, 'Beoordeling van arbeidsongeschiktheid bij SOLK' Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde, vol. 161, no. 0, pp. D1163.

Beoordeling van arbeidsongeschiktheid bij SOLK. / Merkus, S L; Weerdesteijn, K H N; Schaafsma, F G; Maeland, S; Jourdain, M; Canévet, J P; Rat, C; Anema, J R; Werner, E L.

In: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde, Vol. 161, No. 0, 2017, p. D1163.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Beoordeling van arbeidsongeschiktheid bij SOLK

AU - Merkus, S L

AU - Weerdesteijn, K H N

AU - Schaafsma, F G

AU - Maeland, S

AU - Jourdain, M

AU - Canévet, J P

AU - Rat, C

AU - Anema, J R

AU - Werner, E L

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Comparing assessments of incapacity to work in patients with subjective health complaints (SHC) by physicians from 5 different European countries.DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.METHOD: General practitioners from Norway (n=56), Sweden (n=29), Denmark (n=41), France (n=46) and occupational and insurance physicians from the Netherlands (n=93) watched and assessed incapacity to work in nine video vignettes of patients with SHC. We subsequently analysed differences between assessments (whether or not there was incapacity to work) by country, with Norway as a reference, as well as differences between general practitioners from the four countries and occupational and insurance physicians using a generalised linear mixed model.RESULTS: Assessments of incapacity to work by physicians from the 5 countries were generally very similar. However, compared to Norwegian general practitioners, Swedish general practitioners (odds ratio (OR) of 0.43 with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.23-0.79) and Dutch occupational and insurance physicians (OR of 0.55 with 95% CI of 0.36-0.86) concluded less often that the patients in the videos were unable to work. There were no differences between general practitioners from the other 2 European countries and those from Norway. The Dutch occupational and insurance physicians also concluded less often that there was an incapacity to work compared to all general practitioners from the other 4 European countries (OR of 0.67 with 95% CI of 0.49-0.93).CONCLUSION: There are significant differences between assessments of incapacity to work in patients with SHC between countries and professional groups, but these differences are generally small. Potential explanations for these differences could be found in occupational and insurance medicine specialist training and in the existence of professional guidelines.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Comparing assessments of incapacity to work in patients with subjective health complaints (SHC) by physicians from 5 different European countries.DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.METHOD: General practitioners from Norway (n=56), Sweden (n=29), Denmark (n=41), France (n=46) and occupational and insurance physicians from the Netherlands (n=93) watched and assessed incapacity to work in nine video vignettes of patients with SHC. We subsequently analysed differences between assessments (whether or not there was incapacity to work) by country, with Norway as a reference, as well as differences between general practitioners from the four countries and occupational and insurance physicians using a generalised linear mixed model.RESULTS: Assessments of incapacity to work by physicians from the 5 countries were generally very similar. However, compared to Norwegian general practitioners, Swedish general practitioners (odds ratio (OR) of 0.43 with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.23-0.79) and Dutch occupational and insurance physicians (OR of 0.55 with 95% CI of 0.36-0.86) concluded less often that the patients in the videos were unable to work. There were no differences between general practitioners from the other 2 European countries and those from Norway. The Dutch occupational and insurance physicians also concluded less often that there was an incapacity to work compared to all general practitioners from the other 4 European countries (OR of 0.67 with 95% CI of 0.49-0.93).CONCLUSION: There are significant differences between assessments of incapacity to work in patients with SHC between countries and professional groups, but these differences are generally small. Potential explanations for these differences could be found in occupational and insurance medicine specialist training and in the existence of professional guidelines.

KW - English Abstract

KW - Journal Article

M3 - Article

VL - 161

SP - D1163

JO - Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde

JF - Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde

SN - 0028-2162

IS - 0

ER -