ArticleWork (Reading, Mass.)2025
Evidence for return to work following complex orthopaedic injury - a scoping review.
Article in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rates of return to work (RTW) following complex orthopaedic injury are low. No review has summarised current knowledge and prognostic factors for RTW in these patients.
objectivesThis scoping review presents the nature and the extent of current research evidence for the prognostic factors of RTW following complex orthopaedic injury.
methodsThis review was designed using the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Online databases were searched for articles (1969-2023) which covered: return to work, complex orthopaedic injury, and prognostic factors. Complex orthopaedic injury is defined as multiple fractures, open fractures, high energy pelvic injuries or polytrauma with related orthopaedic injury. Data were extracted and placed into an evidence table.
resultsEleven studies were eligible for inclusion. All but one were prospective cohort in design with small patient numbers. There was a skew for studies of open tibial fractures. There was limited breadth of tested prognostic factors. The only commonly reported statistically significant prognostic factors were age, ISS classification and nature of work. Endpoints for RTW ranged from 3 months to 8 years, preventing the pooling of data for meta-analyses.
conclusionIn summary, there is a limited understanding of prognostic factors for RTW following complex orthopaedic injury. Estimates for RTW following these injuries range from 16-90%. The authors recommend that future studies take a holistic approach, using the biopsychosocial model, when investigating prognostic factors for RTW in these patients. This study offers guidance on qualitative investigation, investigative variables and mechanisms to achieve this.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.