Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36085150›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

A comprehensive diagnostic service to clarify intervention needs when work participation is at risk: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial (GIBI, DRKS00027577).

David Fauser, Saskia Dötsch, Claudia Langer, Vera Kleineke, Claudia Kindel, Matthias Bethge

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

David FauserInstitute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Germany. davidpeter.fauser@uksh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3845-3094
Saskia DötschFachklinik Aukrug, Tönsheide 10, 24613, Aukrug, Germany.
Claudia LangerRehaCentrum Hamburg, Heidenkampsweg 41, 20097, Hamburg, Germany.
Vera KleinekeGerman Pension Insurance North, Ziegelstraße 150, 23556, Lübeck, Germany.
Claudia KindelRostocker Zentrum für ambulante Rehabilitation, Wismarsche Str. 32, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
Matthias BethgeInstitute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6417-7812
University of Lübeck · DEGerman Insurance Association · DEMammazentrum Hamburg · DERostocker Zentrum zur Erforschung des Demografischen Wandels · DE

Funding

Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales 661S0183X1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective care services for people whose work participation is at risk require low-threshold access, a comprehensive diagnostic clarification of intervention needs, a connection to the workplace and job demands, and interdisciplinary collaboration between key stakeholders at the interface of rehabilitation and occupational medicine. We have developed a comprehensive diagnostic service to clarify intervention needs for employees with health restrictions and limited work ability: this service is initiated by occupational health physicians. METHODS/

designOur randomized controlled trial tests the effectiveness of a comprehensive diagnostic service for clarifying intervention needs (GIBI: Comprehensive clarification of the need for intervention for people whose work participation is at risk). The comprehensive intervention comprises three elements: initial consultation, two-day diagnostics at a rehabilitation center and follow-up consultations. We will include 210 employees with health restrictions and limited work ability, who are identified by occupational health physicians. All individuals will receive an initial consultation with their occupational health physician to discuss their health, work ability and job demands. After this, half the individuals are randomly assigned to the intervention group and the other half to the waiting-list control group. Individuals in the intervention group start two-day diagnostics, carried out by a multi-professional rehabilitation team in a rehabilitation center, shortly after the initial consultation. The diagnostics will allow first recommendations for improving work participation. The implementation of these recommendations is supported by an occupational health physician in four follow-up consultations. The control group will receive the comprehensive two-day diagnostic service and subsequent follow-up consultations six months after the initial consultation. The primary outcome of the randomized controlled trial is self-rated work ability assessed using the Work Ability Score (0 to 10 points) six months after study inclusion. Secondary outcomes include a range of patient-reported outcomes regarding physical and mental health, impairment, and the physical and mental demands of jobs. DISCUSSION: This randomized controlled trial is designed to test the effects of a new complex intervention involving a comprehensive clarification of intervention needs in order to promote work participation and prevent the worsening of health and work disability.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00027577, February 01, 2022).

Indexed as

MedicineOccupational Health PhysiciansOccupational MedicineDiagnostic ServicesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRehabilitation CentersDiagnostic serviceEmploymentOccupational health physiciansPatient reported outcome measuresRandomized controlled trialWork ability

Identifiers

PMID36085150
PMCPMC9463831
OpenAlexW4295300845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.