Cargando…

Interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE: A variety of interventions aiming to influence physicians’ sickness certification practice have been conducted, most are, however, not evaluated scientifically. The aim of this systematic literature review was to obtain updated knowledge about interventions regarding physicians’ sickness...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: M., Söderman, A., Wennman-Larsen, J. L., Hoving, K., Alexanderson, E., Friberg
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9090374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35254203
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2022.2036420
_version_ 1784704710716948480
author M., Söderman
A., Wennman-Larsen
J. L., Hoving
K., Alexanderson
E., Friberg
author_facet M., Söderman
A., Wennman-Larsen
J. L., Hoving
K., Alexanderson
E., Friberg
author_sort M., Söderman
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: A variety of interventions aiming to influence physicians’ sickness certification practice have been conducted, most are, however, not evaluated scientifically. The aim of this systematic literature review was to obtain updated knowledge about interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice and to summarize their possible effects, in terms of sickness absence (SA) or return to work (RTW) among patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Web of Science up through 15 June 2020 and selected peer-reviewed studies that reported effects of controlled interventions that aimed to improve physicians’ sickness certification practice and used SA or RTW among patients as outcome measures. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effect models. RESULTS: Of the 1399 identified publications, 12 studies covering 9 interventions were assessed as relevant and included in the review. Most (70%) were from the Netherlands, two had a controlled, and seven a randomized controlled study design. All interventions included some type of training of physicians, and two interventions also included IT-support. Regarding the outcomes of SA/RTW, 30 different effect measures were used. In the meta-analyses, no statistically significant effect in favor of the interventions was observed for having any RTW (i.e. first, partial, or full) nor full RTW. CONCLUSIONS: The individual studies showed that physicians’ sickness certification practice might be influenced by interventions in both the intended and non-intended direction, however, no statistically significant effect was indicated by the meta-analysis. The included studies varied considerably concerning intervention content and effect measures. KEY POINTS: The knowledge is very limited regarding the content of interventions directed to physician’s sickness certification practice. The identified interventions included some type of training of physicians, and some of them also included IT-support for physicians. There was a great heterogeneity among the interventions concerning effect measures used regarding return to work among patients. The individual studies showed that physicians’ sickness certification practice might be influenced by interventions in both intended and non-intended directions, however, the overall meta-analysis did not indicate an effect.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9090374
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90903742022-05-11 Interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses M., Söderman A., Wennman-Larsen J. L., Hoving K., Alexanderson E., Friberg Scand J Prim Health Care Original Articles OBJECTIVE: A variety of interventions aiming to influence physicians’ sickness certification practice have been conducted, most are, however, not evaluated scientifically. The aim of this systematic literature review was to obtain updated knowledge about interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice and to summarize their possible effects, in terms of sickness absence (SA) or return to work (RTW) among patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Web of Science up through 15 June 2020 and selected peer-reviewed studies that reported effects of controlled interventions that aimed to improve physicians’ sickness certification practice and used SA or RTW among patients as outcome measures. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effect models. RESULTS: Of the 1399 identified publications, 12 studies covering 9 interventions were assessed as relevant and included in the review. Most (70%) were from the Netherlands, two had a controlled, and seven a randomized controlled study design. All interventions included some type of training of physicians, and two interventions also included IT-support. Regarding the outcomes of SA/RTW, 30 different effect measures were used. In the meta-analyses, no statistically significant effect in favor of the interventions was observed for having any RTW (i.e. first, partial, or full) nor full RTW. CONCLUSIONS: The individual studies showed that physicians’ sickness certification practice might be influenced by interventions in both the intended and non-intended direction, however, no statistically significant effect was indicated by the meta-analysis. The included studies varied considerably concerning intervention content and effect measures. KEY POINTS: The knowledge is very limited regarding the content of interventions directed to physician’s sickness certification practice. The identified interventions included some type of training of physicians, and some of them also included IT-support for physicians. There was a great heterogeneity among the interventions concerning effect measures used regarding return to work among patients. The individual studies showed that physicians’ sickness certification practice might be influenced by interventions in both intended and non-intended directions, however, the overall meta-analysis did not indicate an effect. Taylor & Francis 2022-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9090374/ /pubmed/35254203 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2022.2036420 Text en © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
M., Söderman
A., Wennman-Larsen
J. L., Hoving
K., Alexanderson
E., Friberg
Interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses
title Interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses
title_full Interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses
title_fullStr Interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses
title_full_unstemmed Interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses
title_short Interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses
title_sort interventions regarding physicians’ sickness certification practice – a systematic literature review with meta-analyses
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9090374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35254203
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2022.2036420
work_keys_str_mv AT msoderman interventionsregardingphysicianssicknesscertificationpracticeasystematicliteraturereviewwithmetaanalyses
AT awennmanlarsen interventionsregardingphysicianssicknesscertificationpracticeasystematicliteraturereviewwithmetaanalyses
AT jlhoving interventionsregardingphysicianssicknesscertificationpracticeasystematicliteraturereviewwithmetaanalyses
AT kalexanderson interventionsregardingphysicianssicknesscertificationpracticeasystematicliteraturereviewwithmetaanalyses
AT efriberg interventionsregardingphysicianssicknesscertificationpracticeasystematicliteraturereviewwithmetaanalyses