ArticleDie Rehabilitation2026
[Successful reintegration and economic viability: The entry bonus as a new measure for returning to work].
Article in Die Rehabilitation, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The entry bonus (ESP) is an innovative benefit designed to promote participation in working life, which has been trialled as part of the rehapro support programme. Its main objective is to facilitate the rapid and self-directed reintegration of people with long-term health impairments into the labour market. The ESP is offered as an alternative to the integration subsidy (EGZ) and provides employees with monthly support of up to €400 over a period of six months, as well as a one-time success bonus after twelve months of employment. The measure is intended to motivate people to take up employment, facilitate their transition into working life and improve their chances of participating in social life. Methodology: In the cohort study, rehabilitation statistics data (RSD) from insured persons of the pension insurance institutions Mitteldeutschland and Braunschweig-Hannover who received the ESP or EGZ were evaluated. The main target parameter was the reintegration rate six, 13 and 15 months after the start of the measure and a cost comparison. Secondary parameters such as the sectors of employment were analysed for both groups using descriptive analyses. In addition, a binary logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate predictors of 15 months of employment. Results: During the intervention period, 485 persons received ESP. The RSD analysis showed a higher employment rate for the group receiving ESP for the periods of 6 months, 13 months and 15 months after the start of the measure (91.3% for 6 months, 83.7% for 13 months and 81.2% for 15 months after the start of the measure). The employment rate for the EGZ group was 89.3% after 6 months, 68.7% after 13 months and 63.4% after 15 months after the start of the programme. ESP recipients had 2.4 times higher odds to be in employment after 15 months than EGZ recipients. The measure costs per case were 2.8 times higher in the EGZ group than in the ESP group. Conclusion: Reintegration rate and economic analysis of the ESP show a positive outcome of the pilot project. The benefit reaches a target group that has long-term health restrictions and, in some cases, has been unemployed for a long-term period. KEY MESSAGE: : The entry bonus is a non-purpose-tied benefit for employees. Compared to payments to employers, ESP is an alternative option and achieves a better integration rate at lower costs than the EGZ.
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.