Correspondence in Stakeholder Assessment of Health, Work Capacity and Sick Leave in Workers with Comorbid Subjective...

Purpose The purpose of this study is to test if there is correspondence in stakeholders' assessments of health, work capacity and sickness certification in four workers with comorbid subjective health complaints based on video vignettes. Methods A cross sectional survey among stakeholders (N = 514) in Norway in 2009/2010. Logistic regression and multinomial logistic regression was used to obtain the estimated probability of stakeholders choosing 100 % sick leave, partial sick leave or work and the estimation of odds ratio of stakeholder assessment compared to the other stakeholders for the individual worker. Results The supervisors were less likely to assess poor health and reduced work capacity, and more likely to suggest partial sick leave and full time work compared to the GPs for worker 1. The public was less likely to assess comorbidity and reduced work capacity, and 6 and 12 times more likely to suggest partial sick leave and full time work compared to the GPs for worker 1. Stakeholders generally agreed in their assessments of workers 2 and 3. The public was more likely to assess poor health, comorbidity and reduced work capacity, and the supervisors more likely to assess comorbidity and reduced work capacity, compared to the GPs for worker 4. Compared to the GPs, all other stakeholders were less likely to suggest full time work for this worker. Conclusions Our results seem to suggest that stakeholders have divergent assessments of complaints, health, work capacity, and sickness certification in workers with comorbid subjective health complaints.