Skip to main content

Table 2 Baseline predictors of RTW in original study group.

From: Subgroup analyses on return to work in sick-listed employees with low back pain in a randomised trial comparing brief and multidisciplinary intervention

 

Association with RTW

Interaction

Interaction

  

All participants

Claimants excluded

 

HRR (95% CI)*

P-value**

P-value**

Socio-demographics:

   

Gender (men/women)

1.19 (0.93-1.52)

0.97

0.90

Age (<42/>42 years)

1.15 (0.90-1.97)

0.53

0.67

Marital status (married/single)

1.01 (0.75-1.36)

0.17

0.24

Children (no/yes)

1.25 (0.92-1.69)

0.23

0.21

Education (higher/lower)

1.05 (0.80-1.38)

0.35

0.56

Work-related factors:

   

Public employee (yes/no)

1.06 (0.80-1.41)

0.92

0.72

High work pace (not often/often)

1.21 (0.94-1.54)

0.71

0.82

Colleagues willing to listen to work-related

   

problems (often/not often)

1.33 (1.03-1.72)

0.27

0.63

Support from superior (not often/often)

1.04 (0.79-1.37)

0.41

0.77

Superiors willing to listen to work-related

   

problems (often/not often)

1.14 (0.88-1.47)

0.48

0.63

Job satisfaction (very/not very satisfied)

1.18 (0.91-1.51)

0.020

0.026

Influence on work planning (yes/no)

1.40 (1.03-1.90)

0.16

0.14

Shift work (no/yes)

1.24 (0.91-1.68)

0.64

0.99

Interested in returning to current job (yes/no)

1.22 (0.83-1.81)

0.13

0.13

Health and work-related factors:

   

Risk of losing job because of current

   

sick leave (no/yes)

1.30 (1.00-1.69)

0.27

0.040

Concerned about losing job because of medical condition (no/yes)

1.19 (0.93-1.53)

0.33

0.14

LBP is caused by my work (no/yes)

1.05 (0.81-1.35)

0.28

0.39

Work ability, all in all (good/bad)

1.24 (0.96-1.60)

0.39

0.27

Permanently impaired work ability (no/yes)

1.67 (1.28-2.18)

0.048

0.27

Back at work in 6 months? (sure/not sure)

1.62 (1.24-2.11)

0.84

0.43

Work ability in a year (better/not better)

1.38 (1.05-1.82)

0.68

0.53

Incapacity benefit is desirable (no/yes)

2.04 (1.29-3.23)

0.55

0.33

  1. *adjusted for gender, age and intervention
  2. **adjusted for gender and age
  3. HRR (hazard rate ratio) is shown for each baseline variable without analysis of interaction in first column. In second column, P-values are shown for the interaction between baseline variable and intervention. P-values for the interaction between baseline variables and intervention are also shown after exclusion of 83 participants who have claimed compensation. All variables were dichotomised and analysed with Cox regression.
Back to article page

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

ISSN: 1471-2474

Contact us