What distinguishes responders from nonresponders to a vocational rehabilitation program?

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare responders and nonresponders in terms of work ability (WA) to a multidisciplinary vocational rehabilitation program (MVRP) in Norway. Methods: The WA of 74 participants was tested at baseline and in the final week of a 4–6-week intervention. The participants whose WA increased were defined as WA-responders, whereas participants with no increases or with decreases in their WA after the intervention were defined as WA-nonresponders. Measures of functional health, psychological functioning, and demographics were also collected. Results: Overall, the results of this study indicate that the WA improved and the proportion of participants with poor WA decreased by 26% after the intervention. However, the main outcome of this study was that not all of the participants reported improved WA after the intervention. WA of 43% of the participants did not improve and they were defined as WA-nonresponders, whereas the WA of the other 57% participants improved and they were defined as WA-responders. At baseline, the two groups did not differ significantly in terms of their basic characteristics, whereas there were significant differences between the two groups in terms of pain intensity and sense of mastery variables. Logistic regression analysis identified pain intensity and sense of mastery as significant predictors of WA-response. Conclusion: Multidisciplinary vocational rehabilitation seems effective for some but not all participants. Unfavorable WA responses were more prevalent in participants who reported high pain intensity and low sense of mastery at baseline. It is still a challenge to understand what distinguishes responders from nonresponders to MVRPs; thus, further research is required.