No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Difficulty in ‘Return-to-Work’ After Whiplash Injury: The Role of Pain Self-Efficacy in Mediating the Effects of Neck Disability on Perceived Difficulty in the Return to Work Process
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 February 2012
Abstract
Successful rehabilitation of whiplash injuries is a concern for patients, practitioners and third party payers. Despite advances in scientific knowledge and developments in the field of medical investigations and imaging techniques over recent years, recovery from whiplash injury following motor vehicle accident remains uncertain and controversial. Ongoing symptomatology has been associated with limitations in returning to work and home functioning, however, relationships between neck disability, perceived difficulty in return to work and ability to cope with functional demands despite the pain, have been not been explored. This study examined the relationships between these factors by identifying what daily functional activities were difficult for whiplash injured workers, and also comparing the individual's ability to function despite the pain (pain self-efficacy), with ongoing neck disability (NDI) and perceived difficulty in the return to work process.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- The Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , January 2005 , pp. 22 - 33
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2005
References
Amick, B., Lerner, D., Rogers, W., Rooney, T., & Katz, J. (2000). A Review of Health-Related Work Outcome Measures and Their Uses, and Recommended Measures. Spine, 25(24). 3152–3160.Google Scholar
Amick, B.C. III, Ossmann, J., Habeck, R.V., Fossel, A.H., & Katz, J.N. (2004) Predictors of successful work role functioning following carpal tunnel release surgery. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 46(5), 490–500Google Scholar
Arnstein, P., Caudill, M., Mandle, C.L., Norris, A., & Beasley, R. (1999). Self-efficacy as a mediator of the relationship between pain intensity, disability and depression in chronic pain patients. Pain, 80, 483–491.Google Scholar
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.Google Scholar
Croft, A.C., Herring, P., Freeman, M.D., & Haneline, M.T. (2002). The neck injury criterion: Future considerations. Accid Anal Prev., 34(2), 247–55.Google Scholar
Croft, A.C. & Freeman, M.D. (1998). From railway spine to whiplash. Topics in Clinical Chiropractic (Trauma), 5(3), 54–61.Google Scholar
Council, J.R., Ahern, D.K., Follick, M.J., & Kline, C.L. (1988). Expectancies and functional impairment in chronic low back pain. Pain, 33, 323–331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fairbank, J.C., Couper, J., Davies, J.B., O'Brien, J.P. (1980) The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy, 66(8), 271–3.Google Scholar
Hoving, J.L., O'Leary, E.F., Niere, K.R., Green, S., & Buchbinder, R. (2003). Validity of the neck disability index, Northwick Park neck pain questionnaire and problem elicitation technique for measuring disability associated with whiplash associated disorders. Pain, 102, 273–281.Google Scholar
Nicholas, M.K. (1994). Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ): Preliminary Report, NSW, Australia: University of Sydney Pain Management and Research Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital.Google Scholar
Nicholas, M. (1998). Pain management: Applications of learning theory to medicine, nursing and in the health professions. Lecture Notes, Sydney. Australia: University of Sydney Pain Management & Research Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital.Google Scholar
Kyhlback, M., Thierfelder, T., & Soderlund, A. (2002). Prognostic factors in whiplash-associated disorders. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 25(3), 181–187.Google Scholar
MAIC (2003). Whiplash — Review of CTP QLD Data to 31 DEC 2001. Brisbane, Australia: Motor Accident Insurance Commission, Lord & Bogduk, 1994.Google Scholar
Scholten-Peeters, G.G., Verhagen, A.P., Bekkering, G.E., van der Windt, D.A., Barnsley, L., Oostendorp, R.A., et al. (2003). Prognostic factors of whiplash-associated disorders: A systematic review of prospective cohort studies. Pain, 104(1–2), 303–22.Google Scholar
Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self-efficacy and health behaviours. Self-efficacy in the adoption and maintenance of health behaviours: Theoretical approaches and a new model. In Schwarzer, Ralf (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of action. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
Soderlund, A. & Lindberg, P. (2001). An integrated physiotherapy/cognitive-behavioural approach to the analysis and treatment of chronic whiplash associated disorders, WAD. Disabil. Rehabil. 23(10), 436–47.Google Scholar
Sullivan, M.J.L., Stanish, W., Sullivan, M., Maureen, E., & Tripp, D. (2002). Differential predictors of pain and disability in patients with whiplash injuries. Pain Research and Management, 2, 68–74.Google Scholar
Teasell, R.W. (1997). The clinical picture of whiplash injuries: An overview. Spine. State of the Art Reviews, 7, 373–389.Google Scholar
Teasell, R.W., & Shapiro, A.P., (Eds.). (1993). Cervical Flexion/Extension/ Whiplash Injuries. In State of the Art Reviews, (pp. 329–353). Philadelphia: Hanley and Belfus.Google Scholar
Vernon, H. & Mior, S. (1991). The Neck Disability Index: A Study of reliability and validity. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 14, 409–415.Google Scholar
Watson, P.J. (1999). Non-physiological determinants of physical performance in musculoskeletal pain. In Max, Mitchell (Ed.). Pain 1999 — An Updated Review. Refresher Course Syllabus (p. 153–156). USA: IASP Scientific Program Committee, IASP Press.Google Scholar