Clinical Work-Integrating Care in Current Practice: A Scoping Review.
Lana Kluit, Coen A M van Bennekom, Annechien Beumer and 3 others
PMID 37966538WHAT IT FOUND
Work participation is rarely discussed routinely in hospital care, with conversations mostly initiated by patients.
Medical specialists often lack specific return-to-work guidelines, leading to advice based on personal judgment rather than evidence. This leaves patients with insufficient practical details for their work situations.
Key findings
01Conversations about work are rarely embedded in routine clinical care and are mostly initiated by the patient rather than the specialist.
02Work-related advice is often based on personal judgment because guidelines are unavailable, not used, or lack specific return-to-work details.
03Patients and specialists view the work-related advice provided as insufficient, lacking practical details for specific work situations.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review did not appraise the methodological quality or risk of bias of the included studies. The search was limited to English and Dutch, potentially missing important guidelines and studies from other countries. The gray literature search was performed by a single author, which may have introduced selection bias. The included studies were heterogeneous, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions about the extent of CWIC across all specialties.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The paper does not mention specific funding sources for this review.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the variation in work-related discussions as evidence that specific medical specialties are more effective at facilitating return to work. The review maps current practice and identifies gaps, but it does not test whether increased discussion or adherence to guidelines actually improves patient work outcomes.