4.6 Article

A Prospective Study of Factors Influencing Return to Work After Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury in Taiwan

Journal

ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION
Volume 90, Issue 10, Pages 1716-1722

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.04.006

Keywords

Depression; Employment; Rehabilitation; Social support

Funding

  1. National Health Research Institute [NHRI-EX96-9204PP]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To examine comprehensively the effects of physical, psychologic, and sociologic characteristics on employment among persons after a traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) in Taiwan. Design: A prospective study with follow-up telephone interviews over a 3-year period. Setting: To register people who had sustained an SCI, medical records of 4 hospitals were reviewed using codes of the International Classification of Diseases-9th Revision-Clinical Modifications from 806.0 to 806.9 and from 952.0 to 952.9. Participants: Subjects (N=219) employed at the time of injury. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Employment status after an SCI. Results: The employment rate was 32.9%. After controlling for other variables, education level (relative rate [RR]=4.01 similar to 8.17), autonomy in transportation (RR=5.13), professional licensure (RR=1.86), and thrill and adventure-seeking trait (RR=1.12) were positively and significantly associated with employment, while subjects with more severe overall injury severity (RR=0.95), preinjury chronic conditions (RR=0.20), necessity for aids for daily living (RR=0.31), and depression (RR=0.38) were less likely to have been employed than their counterparts. Conclusions: In addition to education level and traditional physical factors, overall injury severity and psychologic factors such as thrill and adventure seeking and depression can also influence the return to work after an SCI.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available