Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research: A Review with Recommendations for Future Research.
Amanda E Young, Eira Viikari-Juntura, Cécile R L Boot and 3 others
PMID 27787691WHAT IT FOUND
Workplace disability prevention research often misses what employers actually care about.
Scientists focus on health mechanisms and long-term recovery, while employers prioritize immediate costs, production disruption, and staffing impacts. Researchers need to measure outcomes that resonate with business goals, such as productivity and presenteeism, to secure employer engagement.
Key findings
01Employers are primarily interested in direct program costs, production disruption, and immediate workplace benefits, whereas scientists focus on intervention integrity, mechanisms, and long-term health effects.
02Presenteeism (working while sick) is a key scientific measure that employers did not rate as high interest because they view productivity and compliance as more pressing.
03There is a significant gap in measuring workplace outcomes for workers who are still working but experiencing health-related limitations (Type 1), despite this being a critical prevention point.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
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
This is a narrative review, not a systematic review, so it is not an exhaustive search of all literature. The 'employer interest' ratings were subjective, based on a small panel of stakeholders at a single conference. The review focuses on workplace outcomes, so it does not address clinical outcomes that are not explicitly workplace-related. The conceptual framework of four work disability types is a simplification and may not capture all nuances of individual cases.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The work was part of a conference funded by the sponsors of the 'Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability' symposium.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that because a measure is psychometrically strong and scientifically valid, it is valuable to an employer. The review shows that employers often disregard scientific metrics like presenteeism in favor of tangible business costs and production impacts. A therapist who reports only on clinical improvements may fail to secure support for their program if they do not translate those improvements into business language.