Considering biopsychosocial factors
From the first contact with an injured worker, health providers should consider the broader issues impacting on treatment success, rather than a sole focus on the 'bio' component of the injury [1].
A biopyschosocial approach acknowledges that psychosocial factors such as attitudes, beliefs, relationships and social factors can influence the worker’s recovery and return to work outcomes. Addressing biopsychosocial factors with appropriate interventions can facilitate effective return to work efforts. This approach represents a more holistic model of physical and mental health.
Biopsychosocial factors in a compensation setting
Indicators
- Serious pathology
- Pre-existing or co-morbid mental and physical health conditions
- Failure of treatment
Indicators
- Beliefs, attitudes and expectations (for instance, about pain, injury and compensation)
- Catastrophising
- Fear avoidance
- Perceived injustice
- Unhelpful coping strategies
- Personality predispositions (ie, optimism, positive or negative affect, hostility, locus of control)
- Passive role in recovery
- Confidence in ability to manage (self-efficacy)
- Past experience of similar or dissimilar situations
- Past history of trauma
- Depression, anxiety and stress secondary to injury
Indicators
- Low social support at home
- Attitudes, beliefs and expectations of partner/significant other/carer regarding pain, illness and compensation
- Illness or pain behaviour reinforced by family/social environment
- Partner/significant other overly involved in claim and injury management (should be considered in the context of cultural, ethnic, religious or linguistic background)
- Hostile response from partner/significant other
- Financial stress
- Low educational background
Indicators
- Attitude of employer to return to work
- Social support from colleagues/employer
- Belief that work is harmful, will do damage or be dangerous
- Availability of suitable (or alternative/modified) duties
- Job dissatisfaction
- Excessive work demands (lifting, manual handling, extended sitting/standing, constrained or sustained posture, inflexible work schedule)
- Work history includes a pattern of job changes and/or poor vocational direction.
Indicators
- Beliefs, attitudes and expectations about compensation
- Disputes over causation, liability and return to work
- Negative experience of claims process leading to stress
- Salary commensurate compensation may reinforce illness behaviour
- Legal influences may reinforce illness behaviour (multiple specialist assessments, preservation of injury)
Indicators
- Prolonged medical investigation in pursuit of physical cause (may reinforce illness beliefs)
- Dis-continuity of care (changing general practitioners, specialists)
- Poor communication between health providers
- Experience of conflicting diagnosis or explanation for pain
- Reliance upon passive treatment
- Continued symptom focussed treatment in the absence of functional improvement/ongoing benefit
- Sustained use of painkillers, opiates, benzodiazepines
Indicators
- Catastrophisation of injury/pain by health provider
- Health provider emphasises biomedical processes
- Health professional sanctioning disability (providing medical certificates indicating total incapacity)
- Treating doctor fails to respond to communication by case manager/other providers/return to work professionals
- Adversarial attitude toward insurer/compensation authority
- Blurring health issues with industrial/human resources issues
- Foreman P, Murphy G, Swerissen H. Facilitators and barriers to return to work: A literature review. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Primary Care, LaTrobe University; 2006.
Adapted from: WorkCover NSW. FACTORWEB – Personal and environmental risk factors (WC05523), Gosford 2008.