Aims: The starting point of this study was the experience of great problems with persons on long-term sick leave in the county of Västerbotten. In order to illuminate the situation we designed a study of the actors most involved who dealt with persons on long-term sick leave. These actors were the medical doctors; the employers: the social insurance officials; and members of the board of social insurance and persons reporting on the cases to the board. One aim was to describe and analyse the situation for persons on sick leave. Another aim was to describe and analyse the perception of the role the different actors played when dealing with persons on long-term sick leave. The third aim was to describe and analyse the different actors' views of each other, and of the co-operation around the persons on long-term sick leave. Method and material: Interviews with persons on sick leave, employers, social insurance officials and medical doctors. Questionnaires were sent to persons on sick leave, doctors and the members of the board of social insurance and those reporting on the cases. The interviews were audio- taped and transcribed word by word. Coding and analysis of collected data was done simultaneously by performing new interviews, using an adjusted form of grounded theory with the purpose of trying to find patterns and contexts. The aim was to describe the subjective experiences of how the actors look upon their situation and their way of coping with it. Results: The interviews with the employers showed great differences in attitudes and ways of treating employees, which also led to different models for dealing with work environment, sickness absence and rehabilitation. We divided the employers into five different "ideal types". Two of them could be described as "well-functioning" with regard to rehabilitation, and three of them as "less well-functioning". A high degree of flexibility characterises the successful employer, and he also takes good care of his personnel. The good employer also co-operates with other actors. The employers that are not well-functioning are not engaged in making adjustments, and have little confidence in their staff; the unions within their field are weak. Interviews with medical doctors revealed that they felt lonely, and that the demands were frustrating to them. They also had feelings of losing the locus of control. The doctors showed lack of knowledge of the labour market and the social insurance legislation, which made their work harder. They experienced that their lack of time made sickness periods longer. Among the results from the interviews with social insurance officials can be mentioned that they had good knowledge about laws, but sometimes it was difficult to use their knowledge and methods due to lack of flexibility. They experienced feelings of loneliness and had great difficulty in making decisions. Co-operation with partners often did not work out - the officials did not demand so much of their co-actors. The results of the questionnaire directed towards the members of the board of social insurance and those who reported on the cases did not show statistically significant differences between the three counties. The members of the board had almost the same proposals for decision as those who reported on the cases. There were no significant differences between men and women in decision-making. As a whole the members of the board seemed to be skilled in their knowledge of how to use the social insurance legislation. The results of the interviews with persons on sick leave showed that those persons had difficulties in asking for help and support. They felt such loyalty to their employers that they did not ask for adjustments of working places when needed. At the same time they were disappointed that the employers were not sufficiently involved in making it possible to come back to work again. More than half of the respondents had not received enough support from the employers, the medical doctors or the social insurance officials. Most of them felt frustrated, with little or no hope for the future. The results of the questionnaire to persons on long-term sick leave showed that women took a greater responsibility for their own rehabilitation, while the employers showed an earlier interest in sick male employees than in sick female employees. The employers were also keener to adjust the working places for men than for women. Despite those factors, women more often met their employers than men did, and they also had a more positive attitude to social insurance officials and doctors than men had. People with longer education took greater responsibility for their rehabilitation than those with shorter education. Compared to older people, younger persons were more optimistic about their future health and work, and also expressed that work was not so stressful. / digitalisering@umu

<p>There is no common understanding on what constitutes good sick-listing, a frequent and problematic task for many physicians, especially general practitioners (GPs) and orthopaedic surgeons. Aiming to achieve a deeper understanding of sick-listing practices, 19 GPs (I, III) and 18 orthopaedic surgeons (II) in four counties were interviewed, and data analysed qualitatively for views on good sickness certification and barriers to desired practice. Data from a survey of all 7665 physicians in two counties on emotionally straining problems in sickness certification (IV) was analysed quantitatively. </p><p>Some GPs exposed narrow views of sick-listing, where their responsibility was limited to issuing a certificate, while GPs with the most inclusive view had a perspective of the patient’s total life-situation and aimed to help patients shoulder their own responsibility (I). The orthopaedic surgeons´ perceptions of good sick-listing were mainly related to their views on their role in the health-care system. Some perceived their responsibility as confined to the orthopaedic clinic only, while others had the ultimate goal of helping the patient to become well functioning in life with regained work capacity – by means of surgery <i>and</i> proper management of sick-listing (II). </p><p>Difficulty handling conflicting opinions was a barrier to good sickness certification for GPs (III), and problematic for about 50% of all physicians and about 80% of GPs (IV). Orthopaedic surgeons’ handling of such situations varied from being directed by the patient, via compromising, to being directed by professional judgement (II). Other barriers included poor stakeholder collaboration (III). GPs with a workplace-policy on sickness certification reported fewer conflicts and less worry of getting reported to the disciplinary board in relation to sick-listing (IV).</p><p>Understanding physicians’ underlying views on and barriers to practicing “good sick-listing” can inform efforts to change physician practice. Communications skills training in handling sick-listing situations with conflicting opinions is recommended.</p>

There is no common understanding on what constitutes good sick-listing, a frequent and problematic task for many physicians, especially general practitioners (GPs) and orthopaedic surgeons. Aiming to achieve a deeper understanding of sick-listing practices, 19 GPs (I, III) and 18 orthopaedic surgeons (II) in four counties were interviewed, and data analysed qualitatively for views on good sickness certification and barriers to desired practice. Data from a survey of all 7665 physicians in two counties on emotionally straining problems in sickness certification (IV) was analysed quantitatively. Some GPs exposed narrow views of sick-listing, where their responsibility was limited to issuing a certificate, while GPs with the most inclusive view had a perspective of the patient’s total life-situation and aimed to help patients shoulder their own responsibility (I). The orthopaedic surgeons´ perceptions of good sick-listing were mainly related to their views on their role in the health-care system. Some perceived their responsibility as confined to the orthopaedic clinic only, while others had the ultimate goal of helping the patient to become well functioning in life with regained work capacity – by means of surgery and proper management of sick-listing (II). Difficulty handling conflicting opinions was a barrier to good sickness certification for GPs (III), and problematic for about 50% of all physicians and about 80% of GPs (IV). Orthopaedic surgeons’ handling of such situations varied from being directed by the patient, via compromising, to being directed by professional judgement (II). Other barriers included poor stakeholder collaboration (III). GPs with a workplace-policy on sickness certification reported fewer conflicts and less worry of getting reported to the disciplinary board in relation to sick-listing (IV). Understanding physicians’ underlying views on and barriers to practicing “good sick-listing” can inform efforts to change physician practice. Communications skills training in handling sick-listing situations with conflicting opinions is recommended.

<p>Physicians are supposed to act as sick-listing experts and they possess a role as gate-keepers to the social insurance system. Earlier studies have demonstrated variation between physicians and physician categories regarding sick-listing practice. In addition to the patient's disease and its severity, a number of other factors may be expected to influence sick-listing practice. Most earlier studies have focused on the patient's disease and his or her work place as cause for sickness absence.</p><p>The aims of this study were to analyse variation of sick-listing practice between physician categories and the influence of physician characteristics on sick-listing practice, the influence of structure, organisation and remuneration of health care on physician sick-listing practice, the influence of local structural factors in the community, and the influence of a legislative change on physician sick-listing practice.</p><p>The study was conducted as a cross-sectional epidemiological study of 57563 doctors’ certificates for sickness absence, received by 28 local social insurance offices in eight Swedish counties, during four months in 1995 and two months in 1996.</p><p>Patient age, sex, and diagnostic group, issuing physician category, presence of a hospital in the municipality, municipality population size and county were all significantly and independently correlated to number of net days of sick-listing. Physician characteristics, such as age, sex and degree of specialisation were all associated with number of net days of sick-listing. Physicians working in general practice issued significantly shorter periods of sick-listing than the other physician categories. Reimbursement of general practice and participation in financial co-operation with social insurance were significantly correlated to length of sickness episode issued by general practitioners. A legislative change performed during the study period was associated with small effects in sick-listing practice.</p><p>In conclusion, a number of factors other than disease and disease severity and other patient and physician linked factors were found to influence the variation of sick-listing practice. It appears that the closer the influencing factor was to the place were the decision was taken, i.e., the patient-physician consultation, the higher the impact on the decision appeared to be.</p>

Physicians are supposed to act as sick-listing experts and they possess a role as gate-keepers to the social insurance system. Earlier studies have demonstrated variation between physicians and physician categories regarding sick-listing practice. In addition to the patient's disease and its severity, a number of other factors may be expected to influence sick-listing practice. Most earlier studies have focused on the patient's disease and his or her work place as cause for sickness absence. The aims of this study were to analyse variation of sick-listing practice between physician categories and the influence of physician characteristics on sick-listing practice, the influence of structure, organisation and remuneration of health care on physician sick-listing practice, the influence of local structural factors in the community, and the influence of a legislative change on physician sick-listing practice. The study was conducted as a cross-sectional epidemiological study of 57563 doctors’ certificates for sickness absence, received by 28 local social insurance offices in eight Swedish counties, during four months in 1995 and two months in 1996. Patient age, sex, and diagnostic group, issuing physician category, presence of a hospital in the municipality, municipality population size and county were all significantly and independently correlated to number of net days of sick-listing. Physician characteristics, such as age, sex and degree of specialisation were all associated with number of net days of sick-listing. Physicians working in general practice issued significantly shorter periods of sick-listing than the other physician categories. Reimbursement of general practice and participation in financial co-operation with social insurance were significantly correlated to length of sickness episode issued by general practitioners. A legislative change performed during the study period was associated with small effects in sick-listing practice. In conclusion, a number of factors other than disease and disease severity and other patient and physician linked factors were found to influence the variation of sick-listing practice. It appears that the closer the influencing factor was to the place were the decision was taken, i.e., the patient-physician consultation, the higher the impact on the decision appeared to be.