The following article is republished with permission from Mr Gerry Coyle. 

The three R’s of recovery: the impact of Resilience, Responsibility and Readiness
 

BACKGROUND

Workers’ compensation schemes around the world use a range of different strategies, with varying success, to support and encourage the recovery and return to work of workers following a workplace injury or illness. Very little is known about the underlying influences for why some people recover and return to work quickly, while others take much longer, and some simply don’t.

Comcare has implemented a new Survey Research Program to improve its understanding and identify opportunities to influence and improve the recovery and long-term outcomes for injured/ill workers.
 

AIM OF THE RESEARCH

The aim of this research is to better understand the influence that Resilience, perceived Responsibility for injury/illness and Readiness to return to work have on an injured or ill worker’s recovery and return to work.

It is hypothesised that injured / ill workers with high resilience will be:

• less likely to have time off work
• more likely to recover and return to work quickly
• more emotionally and physically ready to return to work, and
• less likely to feel that someone else is responsible for their injury/illness.
   

METHODOLOGY

PARTICIPANTS: Data was collected from a total of 1420 workers from both premium paying (n=884) and self-insured (n=536) organisations with accepted workers’ compensation claims in the Comcare scheme.

QUESTIONNAIRE: The Comcare Injured Worker Survey collects information from injured/ill workers. Respondents took an average of 25 minutes to complete the survey with an overall response rate of 76.5%. The questionnaire collects information on the attitudes, perceptions and experiences of injured workers. Included in the survey is the Brief Resilience Scale, a validated instrument comprising of six items rated on a five point Likert scale, from strongly agree to strongly disagree.

PROCEDURE: An independent research company conducted surveys in November 2011 and again in May 2012 using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI). Using an independent research company ensured confidentiality and anonymity for participants. Information and opt-out letters were sent out prior to the survey commencing.

SAMPLING: A probability proportional to size design was used with a minimum critical sample size of 30. The sampling framework considered the two sectors of the scheme (premium paying and self-insured sectors) and five cohorts with varying incapacity payment durations. A representative sample was obtained.

ANALYSIS: SPSS was used to analyse the data collected.
 

RESULTS
 

Time off Work

Returning to work is an important positive influence in an injured worker’s recovery.

Figure 1: Resilience by current work status.

Injured workers not working were more likely to have low levels of resilience than those working.

50% of injured workers who were not working and had never attempted to return to work had low levels of resilience, compared to 9% of those working and who had no time off work.

Readiness to Return to Work

People do not have to be 100% fit in order to return to work, but they do need to be ready.

Figure 2: Physical and emotional readiness to return to work by resilience.

Injured workers not emotionally ready to return to work were nearly four times more likely to have low levels of resilience, compared to those who were emotionally ready.

Perceived and expected recovery

Perception is reality, so how much people recover can be influenced by their expectations.

Figure 3: Recovery and expected recovery by resilience.

Injured workers who thought they had fully or almost fully recovered were more likely to report high levels of resilience than those who were less positive about their recovery. Similar patterns of resilience were also noted for those who expected to fully or almost fully recover.

Responsibility for injury/illness

Research shows that those who accept responsibility for their injury/illness are more likely to recover and return to work.

Figure 4: Perceptions of responsibility for injury/illness by resilience.

Injured workers who did not feel responsible for their injury/illness were nearly twice as likely to report low levels of resilience than those who felt they were either totally or partially responsible for their accident or illness.

CONCLUSIONS

The data shows that people with high levels of resilience were:

• less likely to have time off following an injury
• more likely to recover and return to work quickly
• more emotionally and physically ready to return to work, and
• less likely to feel that someone else was responsible for their injury/accident.

RESEARCH INTO ACTION

The results of this research suggest that by understanding the resilience levels of workers’ compensation recipients at the beginning of their claim provides an opportunity to manage and support injured workers in a way that best suits their individual recovery needs.

This has been tested in the Comcare environment through a pilot program for new injured workers. Interviewing new claimants has provided Comcare with the opportunity to determine how resilient the injured worker is, identify existing support mechanisms, to manage their expectations, and provide insight into the type and nature of support that each individual may require to help them return to work.

So far, the results of this pilot suggest:

• injured workers are very positive about this initial contact
• there appears to be a reduction in secondary claims
• there are better relationships between claimants, Comcare and their case managers, and
• injured workers are returning to work sooner.

NEXT STEPS

To further understand why some injured workers have different recovery and return to work outcomes.

To integrate the pilot program into ‘business as usual’ within Comcare’s claims management business area.

Contact details

Mr Gerry Coyle
Title: Principal Research Consultant
Comcare
Gerry.Coyle@comcare.gov.au

Comcare Research Team
GPO Box 9905
Canberra ACT 2601