Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
To perform the process evaluation of an intervention that aims to facilitate clinical healthcare professionals (HCP) to provide Maastricht Work-Related Support (WRS) to working patients with a chronic disease.
Methods
A mixed-methods approach was applied to address reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM framework) as well as context of the Maastricht WRS intervention. Qualitative data included interviews with HCPs (N = 10), patients at two time points (N = 10 and N = 9), and field notes. Quantitative data included screening logbooks of HCPs, patient screening forms, and a questionnaire for patients. Content analysis or computation of frequencies was applied where applicable.
Results
Twenty-eight HCPs participated in the intervention (reach). They had a low attitude toward providing Maastricht WRS themselves (adoption). During clinical consultations, they addressed work for 770 of 1,624 (47%) persons of working age. Only 57% (437/770) had paid work, of which 10% (44/437) acknowledged a current need for support. Discussing work during clinical consultations by HCPs was hindered by other medical priorities and patients not disclosing problems (implementation). Over time, Maastricht WRS was less consistently provided (maintenance). Patients reported a positive impact of the intervention, such as fitness for work (efficacy). Context (e.g., lack of urgency, priority, time, and management support) played a pivotal role in the implementation.
Conclusion
This evaluation showed that HCPs had a positive attitude toward WRS in general, but their attitude toward provide Maastricht WRS themselves in daily clinical care was low. Recommendations include improving HCPs’ attitude, addressing WRS as a key policy point, and facilitating time.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference32 articles.
1. Klabbers G, Rooijackers B, Goertz Y, De Rijk A. Powerful and vulnerable: Research into the experiences with employment and social participation of people with chronic diseases and disabilities. [Krachtig en kwetsbaar: Onderzoek naar de ervaringen met arbeidsparticipatie en sociale participatie van mensen met chronische ziekten en beperkingen]. Maastricht: Maastricht University; 2014.
2. Waddell G, Burton AK. Is work good for your health and well-being? London: TSO; 2006.
3. OECD. Health at a glance: Europe. State of health in the EU cycle. Paris: OECD; 2016.
4. Van der Heijde DM, Revicki DA, Gooch KL, Wong RL, Kupper H, Harnam N, et al. Physical function, disease activity, and health-related quality-of-life outcomes after 3 years of adalimumab treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11(4):R124.
5. Van der Burg LR, Ter Wee MM, Boonen A. Effect of biological therapy on work participation in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a systematic review. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71(12):1924–33.