Cargando…
A longitudinal study of the working relationship and return to work: perceptions by clients and occupational therapists in primary health care
BACKGROUND: The working relationship between client and therapist can be important to enhance outcomes from vocational rehabilitation for women with stress-related disorders in primary health care. The aim was to investigate the working relationship, as perceived by clients and therapists in the Red...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4397877/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25887461 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0258-1 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: The working relationship between client and therapist can be important to enhance outcomes from vocational rehabilitation for women with stress-related disorders in primary health care. The aim was to investigate the working relationship, as perceived by clients and therapists in the Redesigning Daily Occupations (ReDO™) program, and its relationships to return to work and satisfaction with the rehabilitation. Another aim was to compare the ReDO™ group and a “care-as-usual” (CAU) group regarding perceptions of the working relationship with the social insurance officer. METHOD: Forty-two ReDO™ clients and 42 matched controls receiving CAU participated. The study included four measurements (baseline, after 16 weeks rehabilitation and follow-ups after 6 and 12 months). 37 + 37 clients completed. Return to work data was obtained from the Social Insurance Offices (SIO), and the working relationship and client satisfaction were assessed by self-report questionnaires. RESULTS: The clients rated the working relationship higher than the therapists (mean rating 101.1 vs. 93.9; p < 0.001). The therapists’ rating showed a statistically significant association with return to work at the 12-month follow-up, and the clients’ perceptions were statistically significantly related to how they rated satisfaction with the rehabilitation received. The ReDO™ and the CAU groups did not differ regarding how they rated the relationship with the SIO officer (mean ratings 83.9 vs. 77; p = 0.189). The working relationship with the SIO officer was not related to return to work, but an association (r(s) = 0.70, p < 0.001) to client satisfaction at 16 weeks appeared in the CAU group alone. CONCLUSION: The working relationship as perceived by clients and therapists seemed to be partly separate phenomena, the client perceptions being linked with satisfaction with the rehabilitation and the therapist perceptions with the clients’ return to work. The relationship to the SIO officers was of no importance to return to work but was of some significance for satisfaction with the rehabilitation among the CAU clients. Therapists should strive to improve the relationship with clients to whom they feel the relationship is fragile since that might enhance the chances for those clients to return to work. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT01234961) 2 November 2010. |
---|