Evidence Hub

Predictors of return to work for people on sick leave with depression, anxiety and stress: secondary analysis from a randomized controlled trial

S. Bjørkedal, J. Fisker, Lone Hellström, A. Hoff, R. Poulsen, C. Hjorthøj, A. Bojesen, N. Rosenberg et al.

International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 2023

1,245 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

Purpose Knowledge about predictors of return to work (RTW) in people on sick leave with common mental disorders (CMDs) may inform the development of effective vocational rehabilitation interventions for this target group. In this study, we investigated predictors of RTW at 6 and 12 months in people on sick leave with depression, anxiety disorders or stress-related disorders. Methods We have performed a secondary analysis, utilizing data from two RCTs that evaluated the efficacy of an integrated health care and vocational rehabilitation intervention. Data were obtained from mental health assessments, questionnaires and registers. Using Cox regression analysis, the relationship between baseline variables and RTW was analysed at 6 and 12 months after randomization within the group of CMD as a whole and within the subgroups of depression, anxiety and stress-related disorders. Results Symptom burden and employment status at baseline predicted RTW in the CMD group ( n = 1245) and in the three diagnostic subgroups at both time points. RTW self-efficacy predicted RTW in the depression group but not in the anxiety or stress subgroups. Conclusion Many predictors of RTW were similar over time and, to some extent, across the CMD subgroups. Findings highlight the need not only to take health-related and psychological factors into account when developing vocational rehabilitation interventions but also to consider workplace strategies and options for support.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,245 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free