Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36188871›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2021

Systematic Review of Biopsychosocial Prognostic Factors for Return to Work After Acute Orthopedic Trauma: A 2020 Update.

Hong Phuoc Duong, Anne Garcia, Roger Hilfiker, Bertrand Léger, François Luthi

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Functional outcomes after ankle fracture-dislocation: a systematic review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Clinical, social, and situational determinants of prolonged recovery after commuting.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

5 authors.

Hong Phuoc DuongDepartment of Medical Research, Clinique Romande de Réadaptation, Sion, Switzerland.
Anne GarciaDepartment of Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, Clinique Romande de Réadaptation, Sion, Switzerland.
Roger HilfikerSchool of Health Sciences, HES-SO Valais-Wallis, Sion, Switzerland.
Bertrand LégerDepartment of Medical Research, Clinique Romande de Réadaptation, Sion, Switzerland.
François LuthiDepartment of Medical Research, Clinique Romande de Réadaptation, Sion, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To provide updated evidence on prognostic factors for return to work (RTW) in the early and late phases after acute orthopedic trauma from a biopsychosocial perspective. Methods: A systematic review of articles indexed in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase databases between 2010 and 2020 was performed. The inclusion criteria were cohort studies of employed populations sustaining acute orthopedic trauma with follow-up data on RTW. Biopsychosocial prognostic factors for RTW must be reported in the multiple regression models and divided into early (≤ 6 months) and late phases (> 6 months) postinjury. Two reviewers performed study selection, assessed the risk of bias and quality using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and extracted data independently. Results: Thirty articles were included with a follow-up period of 1-58 months. Based on the QUIPS tool, 7 studies (23%) were considered to have a low risk of bias, and 21 studies (70%) were considered to have a moderate risk of bias. Based on the NOS, the quality was high in 87% of the included studies. The RTW rates ranged from 22% to 74% in the early phase and from 44% to 94% in the late phase. In the early phase, strong evidence was found for injury severity. In the late phase, strong evidence was found for age, injury severity, level of pain, self-efficacy, educational level, blue-collar work, and compensation status; moderate evidence was found for recovery expectations and physical workload. There was limited or inconsistent evidence for the other factors. Conclusion: Based on the levels of evidence, injury severity should be considered as one of the key barriers to RTW in the early and late phases postinjury. This finding underlines the need for serious injury prevention efforts. Our results also emphasize the multifaceted actions of the biopsychosocial model to facilitate RTW: promoting policies for older injured workers, improving access to medical and rehabilitation facilities, and adapting physical workload. Multiple other factors are likely important but require additional high-quality studies to assess their role in the RTW process.

Indexed as

biopsychosocial factorsinjuryorthopaedic traumaprognostic factorsreturn to workwork disability

Identifiers

PMID36188871
PMCPMC9397710

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.