An interventional study of Risk Score for non-return to work in Pain, sponsored by Clinique Romande de Readaptation. Completed at 1 site in Switzerland. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 62 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-01-23.
Sponsored by Clinique Romande de Readaptation · Not applicable, Interventional, and Screening
Background: Orthopaedic trauma are a leading cause of long-lasting sick-leave and persistent disability. People suffering from persistent sick-leave often need vocational rehabilitation (VR). Vocational programs are planned to improve the likelihood of returning to work (RTW). Physical conditioning, professional evaluation and training, as well as psychological and social interventions are the core of the treatments. Efficiency of these programs is moderate and there is scope for improvements. For instance, rehabilitation programs tailored to the individual needs and potentials are called for. However, the allocation remains difficult. Decision-supportive tools may be convenient to achieve this goal. Recently, the WORRK model was proposed to assess early on the risk of non-returning to work for those patients. The main goal of this research is to measure if the WORRK model improves patients' allocation to different vocational programs according to their "non-return to work" risk.
Methods:
Vocational inpatients after orthopaedic trauma (n=280), aged between 18-60 years. Three different vocational pathways can be selected: Simple (for patients with low "non-return to work" risk, 5 weeks stay), Coaching (intermediate risk, 5 weeks), Evaluation (high risk, 3 weeks). Design: randomized-controlled trial. In the intervention group, the probability not to return to work estimated with the WORRK model will be offered to the clinician team before the allocation decisions. In the control group, the probability will also be estimated but not known by the clinician team. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients allocated to the Evaluation Pathway. Secondary outcomes: the patients' satisfaction is not worse in the intervention group; the decisions makers' satisfaction with the information available for the decision process is better in the intervention group; the proportion of patients changing the treatment pathway during the vocational stay is not higher in the intervention group; and the calibration of the WORRK model remains satisfactory; the non-return to work rate is not higher in the intervention group than in the control group (follow-up at 3, 12, and 24 months);
Relevance and impact:
The investigators expect that the WORRK model will improve the efficiency of vocational rehabilitation after orthopedic trauma. This will due to better allocation to the vocational pathways according to the patients' risk profile. If this is the case, an increase of the shorter vocational program is expected without jeopardizing the chance of returning to work and the patient satisfaction with quality of care. The ability of the WORRK model to detect patients with similar risk profiles could also strengthen the interest for this decision-supportive tool in clinical practice and trials.
Exclusion Criteria:
The WORRK model is a predictive tool (19 items) of the non-return to work risk useful for all kinds of orthopaedic trauma and for patients needing vocational rehabilitation. It is constructed with variables independent of the patient's education and language fluency. It is a short patient's bedside tool and takes less than 20 minutes.
Other: Risk Score for non-return to work
In this group the medical staff will not be informed about the risk score (WORRK).
The WORRK tool will be filled in for all patients, even the patients in the control group. However, the probability score will only be accessible for the medical doctors in the intervention group, along with guidelines for interpretation ("1. With a probability score over 50% (not to return to work), patient's allocation to the "Evaluation Pathway" should be considered" "2. With a probability score over 70% (not to return to work), the "Evaluation Pathway" is probably the most suitable choice").
Allocation to the evaluation pathway (proportion of patients allocated to the Evaluation Pathway)
The primary outcome in the WORRK study is the proportion of patients allocated to the Evaluation Pathway.
Time frame: 10 months
Return to work rate
The non-return to work rate will be assessed by questionnaire at 3, 12 and 24 months after discharge.
Time frame: 24 months
the patients' satisfaction is not worse in the intervention group
At discharge patients will fill a questionnaire to assess their satisfaction regarding the treatments received.
Time frame: 10 months
the decisions makers' satisfaction with the information available for the decision process is better in the intervention group
Medical staff will assess efficiency of the intervention through a questionnaire
Time frame: 10 months
the proportion of patients changing the treatment pathway during the vocational stay is not higher in the intervention group
To assess if patients change their clinical pathway during hospitalization. Is there any differences between the intervention and control groups.
Time frame: 10 months
the calibration of the WORRK model remains satisfactory
We will perform a new validation of the WORRK model on the population recruited from this study. The performance of the WORRK prediction tool will be assessed with measures for calibration and discrimination. For calibration we will plot the expected against the observed proportion of non-return to work per predicted risk group. Furthermore, we will use the Hosmer-Lemeshow test to define statistical significance of the calibration. For discrimination, we will plot the ROC-curve and calculate Areas under the ROC-curve (AUC). We consider the performance of the WORRL acceptable if there is good calibration (i.e. intercept not statistically different from 0 and slope of 1) and if the AUC is larger than 0.7.
Time frame: 24 months
This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Clinique Romande de Readaptation