Trajectory and predictors of return-to-work outcomes for people after a road traffic injury: A prospective cohort study

Trajectory and predictors of return-to-work outcomes for people after a road traffic injury: A prospective cohort study | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Trajectory and predictors of return-to-work outcomes for people after a road traffic injury: A prospective cohort study Masoumeh Abedi, Tammy Aplin, Elise Gane, Venerina Johnston This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8246087/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 30 Apr, 2026 Read the published version in Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation → Version 1 posted 9 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Identifying factors influencing work after road traffic injuries (RTI) is important for developing early and appropriate interventions. Purpose : This study aimed to quantify vocational outcomes up to 12 months after RTIs; to explore Return to work (RTW) trajectories over this period; and to identify predictors of RTW status and disability days at baseline, 6, and 12 months post-RTI. Methods : Individuals aged 18 to 64 years with mild to serious RTI presenting to two Australian public hospital emergency departments were recruited. Exclusions were severe injury and not being in paid employment pre-injury. Assessment occurred at baseline, six months, and 12 months post-RTI. Results : Sixty-three participants completed the baseline survey. By 12 months, 88% had returned to work, mostly with work modifications, while 13% experienced at least one RTW failure. Mean disability days were 48 (SD= 93). Predictors of RTW at baseline were lower injury severity, less pain/disability, and younger age (R²=0.65, p<0.05); at 6 months, being a casual/part-time employee (R 2 = 0.2, p<0.05) and at 12 months, higher pre-injury income (R 2 = 0.25, p<0.05). Predictors of more disability days at baseline included being male, hospital admission, greater injury severity, greater disability, lodging a compensation claim, and higher distress from intrusion (R 2 = 0.53, p<0.05); at 6 months, older age and lower RTW self-efficacy (R 2 = 0.18, p<0.05); and at 12 months, older age, lower level of education, greater injury severity, and casual/part-time pre-injury employment (R 2 = 0.29, p<0.05). Conclusions : RTW after RTI is a dynamic, staged process. Early outcomes are primarily health-related, whereas 6–12-month outcomes are shaped by psychosocial factors. Sustained RTW often requires work modifications, underscoring the need for coordinated, systems-based rehabilitation strategies. Return to work disability traffic accidents longitudinal cohort study Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 1. Introduction Road traffic crashes are a major global concern, costing countries an estimated 2–5% of their gross domestic product, with the relative burden generally higher in low- and middle-income countries than in high-income settings ( 1 ). Around 50 million people experience a Road Traffic Injury (RTI) every year ( 2 ). These injuries were the main cause of global disease burden (as measured by disability-adjusted life year) for individuals aged 10–49 years between 1990 and 2019 ( 3 ). Disability from RTI results in considerable economic burden for societies. In Australia, RTIs cost about AU $ 11.8 billion annually between 2016 and 2020, including AU $ 2.3 billion in medical costs and AU $ 1.54 billion in disability-related expenses ( 4 ). Additionally, reduced work ability due to RTI is reported to negatively influence the injured persons’ health condition, financial situation, their family and workplace ( 5 ). On the other hand, return to work (RTW) is associated with an increase in the injured persons’ confidence while decreasing their dependence on social support ( 6 ). For this reason, RTW is considered a critical milestone in the rehabilitation process. Therefore, obtaining a better understanding of the factors impacting RTW following RTI is critical in working towards the recovery of injured individuals and reducing the associated personal and societal costs. A broad range of factors potentially influencing RTW following RTI have been examined in the literature. A recent systematic review of studies published between 1997 and 2020, covering 11 studies from Australia, the UK, Canada, and Denmark, found strong evidence that better health status and higher RTW expectancy predict earlier RTW, with follow-up periods ranging from one month to three years ( 7 ). The review also reported strong evidence for no association between RTW and demographic factors such as age or gender and found no consistent link with fault status. While these findings highlight the importance of health and individual expectations, they also point to a relative lack of attention to system-related influences. Consequently, there remains limited knowledge on the role of legal, insurance, workplace, and healthcare factors in shaping RTW outcomes after RTI. For instance, it is suggested that differences in compensation schemes may result in identifying different barriers and facilitators to RTW ( 8 , 9 ). In Australia, the majority of studies that investigated these factors have been conducted in jurisdictions operating a ‘no-fault’ scheme (6, 10–12) in which injured individuals have access to medical and financial support regardless of their fault status in the crash. Therefore, the findings may not be generalizable to other states like Queensland that operate a “fault-based” scheme. In this scheme for nonwork-related RTI, only injured people who are not at fault in the crash are supported financially and medically through the Compulsory Third Party (CTP) insurer of the at-fault driver. This may lead at-fault individuals to experience other types of challenges like financial difficulties and stress arising from the claim process which have been shown can significantly influence work outcomes ( 13 – 16 ). Therefore, there is a need to determine the factors associated with RTW after a RTI in a “fault-based” scheme. It has been proposed that factors associated with RTW may vary with the way the concept of work is measured ( 6 , 10 ). Previous studies have often used dichotomous outcomes (RTW vs Not RTW), self-reported work disability days, or compensated days, with most utilising the date of first RTW as the main measure of RTW ( 6 , 9 , 13 , 17 ). However, RTW is both an endpoint and a process ( 18 ). According to previous findings, injured individuals may take different RTW trajectories after a RTI ( 16 ). Earlier studies show large heterogeneity in RTW trajectories after RTI with some individuals requiring multiple RTW attempts and periods of time away from work ( 6 , 10 , 12 ). This suggests that depending on individual variations, more or different interventions may be needed to facilitate RTW following RTI. However, so far only a few studies investigated the RTW trajectory of injured people following RTI ( 6 , 10 ). To address the knowledge gaps, a prospective cohort study was conducted in Queensland, Australia to better understand the impact of road traffic crashes on RTW of injured people using different work outcome measures assessed repeatedly within one year of RTI. The objectives of this study were to: quantify the impact of RTI on a set of vocational outcomes (e.g., RTW status, number of disability days, lost work hours, RTW self-efficacy, work productivity and performance) at baseline, six months, and 12 months post-injury explore the RTW trajectories of injured persons over 12 months following their RTI; and identify predictors of RTW status and disability days at baseline, six months, and 12 months post-RTI. 2. Methods 2.1. Study design and Setting This study was a longitudinal inception cohort study, with the protocol published previously ( 19 ). For the present analysis, only those who were working pre-injury were included. The study was conducted in Queensland, the third most populous state in Australia with a population of over 5 million. 2.2. Participants Individuals who had been injured in a road traffic crash in the previous 28 days formed the study cohort. The study sample included both compensable (within a fault-based scheme) and non-compensable participants to capture the experiences of all individuals affected by RTI. To be eligible to participate, individuals must: ( 1 ) have been aged 18–64 years; ( 2 ) have sustained a mild or moderate injury as the result of a road traffic crash for which the individual had sought advice from a medical practitioner or other healthcare provider; ( 3 ) have been injured due to a crash involving a motorised vehicle on land in Queensland; ( 4 ) have been a driver, rider, passenger, pillion passenger, cyclist, or pedestrian in the crash; ( 5 ) have proficient English language skills to understand and complete the questionnaire as well as the consent form. Participants were excluded if: ( 1 ) their injury had occurred as a result of a crash involving other types of land transport (e.g. trains and light rail, or bicycle) without the involvement of a motorised vehicle; ( 2 ) they had sustained a severe injury, including severe traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, extensive burns or multiple amputations; ( 3 ) had an injury requiring hospitalisation for more than 10 days; ( 4 ) had sustained an injury that occurred as a result of intentional self-harm; ( 5 ) had dementia or significant cognitive impairment affecting their ability to provide informed consent. 2.3. Ethical clearance Ethics approval was granted from the Townsville Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (reference HREC/18/QTHS/131) and The University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (reference 2018001693) in accordance with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research. 2.4. Recruitment and consent Electronic medical records within emergency departments at the Townsville Hospital and Princess Alexandra Hospital were screened on a weekly basis for potential participants. An introductory letter and the participant information and consent form were posted to potential participants to inform them that the research team would contact them regarding this study. Patients were then followed up via telephone to discuss participation, confirm eligibility and to obtain verbal consent. Upon obtaining the verbal consent, participants received online or hard copy versions of the consent form and questionnaires depending on their preference. For those who preferred to receive hard-copy questionnaires via post, a reply-paid envelope was also included for the return of the completed forms. All participants provided verbal and written informed consent. To minimise selection bias, consistent screening procedures and inclusion criteria were applied across both sites, ensuring systematic identification of eligible participants. The use of multiple modes of questionnaire delivery (online and postal) helped to improve accessibility and reduce non-response bias. 2.5. Data collection Recruitment occurred between October 2018 to September 2019 and data collection completed in September 2020. Data were collected using a series of self-reported questionnaires at 9 timepoints, including baseline (within 28 days of the road traffic crash), and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12 months post-baseline. The questionnaires took approximately 20–25 minutes to be completed, and participants were reimbursed $ 25 after the completion of the baseline, 6 month and 12-month questionnaires. Questionnaire data was managed within an online service called REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture). 2.5.1. Measures 2.5.1.1. Outcome measures Two vocational outcomes were assessed at each timepoint. RTW status - RTW status was used as a primary outcome, defined as a binary variable (Yes/No). Participants were asked whether they had successfully returned to work (Yes) or had not returned (No). Number of disability days - At each timepoint, participants reported their RTW date, whether they had left their job since the last survey, and the number of workdays lost due to their RTI. Disability days were calculated as the total time off work, combining days absent before initial RTW with any additional sick leave days taken after RTW. 2.5.1.2. Predictors Socio-demographics and pre-injury health status - at baseline participants were asked about their socio-demographic information, including age, gender, level of education, marital status, pre-injury job (e.g., type of occupation, employment status, the extent to which their job was physically/mentally demanding, and annual salary), and whether they had a comorbidity (i.e., arthritis, asthma, back pain, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or a mental health condition). Crash-and injury-related measures - At baseline, participants self-reported information associated with their crash (i.e. their role in the crash), and their injury such as the diagnosis/es of injury, if they were admitted to hospital, the number of nights stayed in the hospital, if they took medication or received any treatments (i.e., Physiotherapy/ Exercise/ Ergonomics and Occupational Therapy/ Chiropractic treatment/ Acupuncture/ Osteopathy/ Psychological counselling/ Remedial massage/other), and if they received a medical certificate to RTW. Work-related measures - Those who did RTW were asked if they returned to the same position and same company or a different position and/or different company. They were also asked if they had made any types of modifications at work (i.e., fewer working hours, more breaks during the workday, flexible work schedule, reduce physical demands of the job, perform different duties/work tasks, ask others to assist with duties, use assistive devices/tools, rearrange the workspace). In addition, participants were asked about the degree to which their post-injury job is mentally/physically demanding. To indicate the quality of RTW, a few questions taken from the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire v2.0 ( 20 ) and the World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire ( 21 , 22 ) were used to assess absolute absenteeism and presenteeism at work. Furthermore, Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 5-item version ( 23 , 24 ) was used to assess the impaired workability. Finally, self-efficacy regarding RTW was assessed using a 10-item scale derived from the Return to Work Self-Efficacy Scale ( 25 ). This scale consists of three factors: ability to cope with pain, receiving help from supervisor, and receiving help from co-workers. Quality of life - The EuroQol 5 dimensions 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) ( 26 ) was used to measure quality of life. The participants were asked to report their health state by indicating their level of difficulty in each of the five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). They also self-rated their health status on a vertical visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). EQ-5D- VAS score and EQ-5D utility score (total score) were used. Pain - The 10-item Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (ÖMPSQ)- Short-form ( 27 ) was used to assess the physical and functional level and adjustment to injury and pain. The tool consists of five domains: pain; self-perceived function; distress; RTW expectancy; and fear avoidance beliefs. The ÖMPSQ total score ranges between 1 and 100 with higher scores indicating greater disability. Responses to two questions regarding RTW expectancy were also reported. Participants were asked to indicate the chances of being able to work in three and six months from 0 (no chance) to 10 (very large chance). Disability - The level of disability due to the RTI was measured using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule version 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) ( 28 ). This tool consists of 12 items assessing activity limitations and participation restrictions (i.e., disability) in the prior month. Disability was assessed across six domains: understanding and communicating; getting around; self-care; getting along with people; life activities (i.e., household, work, and/or school activities); and participation in society. WHODAS summary score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 100 (full disability) was reported. Global Perceived Effect (GPE) scale ( 29 )- Participants rated their current health status compared to immediately before their RTI. This is an 11-point numerical scale ranging from “-5” (Vastly worse) to “5” (Vastly better). Unchanged health would be rated as “0”. Anxiety and depression - The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) ( 30 ) is a reliable tool ( 31 , 32 ), consisting of 14-items evaluating depression and anxiety symptoms in the past week. Anxiety and depression are measured by seven questions each, which produce sub-scale scores that are summed to produce a total score. ‘Cases’ of depression or anxiety are defined as a sub-scale score of 11 to 21. The Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) ( 33 ) is a self-report measure used to assesses subjective distress resulted from traumatic events. This tool includes 22 items asking participants to rate their degree of distress during the past week on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). Subscale scores can be produced for avoidance, intrusion, and hyper-arousal. The mean of each subscale was used in the analysis. The Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ) ( 34 ) is a 12-item scale used to enquire about the frequency of experiencing a sense of unfairness regarding the sustained injury on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (all the time). The IEQ provides two correlated factors of severity/irreparability of loss, and blame/unfairness. The Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) ( 35 ) is a questionnaire used to assess the ability of the participants to recover from stress. The tool includes six items asking participants to indicate their level of agreement with each item on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The sum of the 6 item scores produces a total score between 6 (low resilience) and 30 (high resilience). Perceived threat to life ( 36 ) is used to predict post-traumatic stress disorder onset and early symptoms of acute stress reaction ( 36 ). Participants are asked "How much did you believe you were going to die during the accident?" and rate their response on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very strongly). System-related measures - Participants indicated the degree to which their family, employers, health professionals, and insurance case managers was supportive when attempting to RTW on a 7 -point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). They also indicated if they lodged a claim for compensation or engaged legal representation. Those who reported lodging a claim were asked to rate the degree of stress associated with the navigation and duration of the claim from 1 (a little stressful) to 5 (extremely stressful). Receipt of medical certificate at the time of RTI was also assessed. 2.5.2. Sample size It was determined that a sample of 60 participants would be required for this study. This sample size was based on the anticipated number of predictors to be included in the final regression modelling. For regression equations using six or more predictors, an absolute minimum of 10 participants per predictor variable is considered appropriate ( 37 ). 2.5.3. Statistical analysis The data were cleaned and analysed in SPSS version 28 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). Summary statistics were utilised to describe the characteristics of participants who completed the baseline survey. Specifically, we used frequencies and percentages for categorical data and means and standard deviations for continuous data. Differences between respondents vs non-respondents at one, six, and 12-months post-baseline (major drop-out times) were assessed with Fisher’s Exact test for categorical variables, and Mann-Witney test for continuous variables due to non-normal distribution of data (P value < 0.05). Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine which baseline factors predict RTW status and number of disability days at baseline, and six- and 12-months post-baseline. Firstly, the association between the independent baseline factors and dependent variables were assessed with a correlation matrix (Spearman Rank Bivariate Correlation Test). Independent baseline variables with a significant association of p < 0.1 were included in the multivariate regression model. A Binominal logistic regression model with backwards elimination was used to identify significant predictors of RTW status at baseline, and 6- and 12- months post baseline. The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) method was used to assess the fit of the final regression model, where a lower AIC score indicated a better model fit. Negelkerke R 2 was used to compare the models with and without a predictor included. Predictors were kept in the model if the regression test had a result with p < 0.05. To determine variables predicting number of disability days at baseline, and six- and 12-months post-baseline, baseline variables that were correlated with the dependant outcome (p < 0.1), were entered in the multivariate regression model using backwards method. The presence of multi-collinearity was detected with the variance inflation factor (VIF): If 2 variables were highly correlated, only one was selected based on VIF > 2. Additionally, the final model was determined after being checked by AIC score. 3. Results Of 728 patients screened from the emergency department records, 127 eligible people responded to the invitation and consented to participate in this study (Fig. 1 ). Of those, 77 participants completed the baseline questionnaire (60%). As this study focused on work outcomes, participants not working pre-injury were not included in this study (n = 14). Hence, the results of this study are based on the subset of 63 participants who were employed prior to the injury. The lowest response rate throughout this study was for the final 12-month follow-up assessment (n = 41), bringing the retention rate to about 32% towards the end of study. Figure 1 illustrates the recruitment and sample size at all assessment timepoints. The main reason for the lost to follow up was inability of the researchers to make contact with these participants despite several attempts and using various modes of contact. Baseline characteristics and health status of respondents compared to non-respondents at six- and 12-months post-baseline is presented in Table 1 . No significant difference was observed between respondents and non-respondents’ groups except for the level of education (p < 0.05). At the six-month post-baseline assessment, the respondent group had significantly higher level of education compared to the non-respondent group. Table 1 characteristics compared to non-participants at six- and 12-months post-baseline Variable Participation at 6 months Participation at 12 months Non-respondents (n = 13) Respondents (n = 50) P Non-respondents (n = 22) Respondents (n = 41) P Age (years), Mean (SD) 39.5( 16 ) 41.8( 13 ) NS 1 39.4( 13 ) 42.3( 14 ) NS 1 Gender (female), No. (%) 7( 11 ) 24( 38 ) NS 2 10( 16 ) 21( 33 ) NS 2 Marital status, No. (%) Married/de facto relationship 5( 8 ) 30( 48 ) NS 2 12( 19 ) 23( 36 ) NS 2 Single 8( 13 ) 20( 31 ) 10( 16 ) 18( 29 ) Education level, No. (%) Tertiary education 5( 8 ) 40(63) * 2 16(25.5) 29( 46 ) NS 2 Secondary education 8(12.5) 10(15.5) 6(9.5) 12( 19 ) Comorbidities (Yes), No. (%) 6(9.5) 25( 40 ) NS 2 11( 17 ) 20( 32 ) NS 2 1 Mann-Witney Test, 2 Fisher’s Exact Test, *P < 0.05, NS not significant 3.1. Baseline characteristics Table 2 shows the baseline characteristics of study participants (n = 63). The mean age of participants was 41 years (range 18–64 years, SD = 14) of which 50% were women (n = 31) and 56% were married or in a de-facto relationship (n = 36). Over 70% of participants had a tertiary education (n = 45). The most frequent type of jobs reported were managerial and professional jobs (43%, n = 27). Almost half of participants were admitted to hospital after their road traffic crash (n = 30), and the most common type of injuries sustained were soft tissue injuries like whiplash (51%, n = 32). One third of participants lodged a claim for compensation related to their RTI (n = 19) and around 50% of these participants reported experiencing high level of stress associated with the duration of the claim process. Most participants received a high level of support from their families (85%, n = 53), treating health professionals (70%, n = 44), and employers (63%, n = 33). The majority of participants reported a high level of recovery expectancy at baseline (94%, n = 59). Around one-third of participants reported an elevated level of anxiety (n = 22) and PTSD symptoms (n = 19). The resilience level was low for 38% (n = 24) of participants. Quality of life, measured with the EQ-5D index, averaged > 0.60 (scale − 1 to 1). Baseline pain and disability, assessed using the ÖMPSQ and WHODAS, had mean scores > 40 on both instruments (0–100; higher scores indicate greater pain/disability). Table 2 Sample characteristics at baseline assessment (n = 63) Sociodemographic information Mean (SD), range No. (%) Age 41( 14 ), 18–64 Gender (female) 31( 49 ) Marital status ( Married/de facto relationship) 35(56) Education level (tertiary education (i.e., university degree, diploma, certificate I-IV) 45(71) Pre-injury occupation type Manager/ Professional 27( 43 ) Technician/trade worker 4( 6 ) Community/personal service worker 5( 8 ) Administrative worker/sale worker/ Machinery operator/driver 11( 17 ) Other 16( 25 ) Pre-injury employment status Self-employed 5( 8 ) Full time 38(60) Part time 12( 19 ) Casual employment 8( 13 ) Physically demanding pre-injury job (high) 37(59) Mentally demanding pre-injury job (high) 56(89) Annual salary pre-injury ( $51,999 or more) 42(67) Having comorbidities pre-injury 31( 49 ) Road traffic crash and injury -related information Mean (SD), range No. (%) Road user type Driver 28(44.5) Rider (on a motorbike) 28(44.5) Passenger/ Pedestrian/cyclist 8( 11 ) Admitted to hospital (yes) 30( 48 ) Hospital stays (nights) Taking medication post-injury (yes) 56(89) Received treatment (yes) 44(70) Type of injury Soft tissue including whiplash 32( 51 ) Dislocation 7( 11 ) Fracture 24( 38 ) Received medical certificate(yes) 49(78) Lodge a claim for compensation (yes) 19( 30 ) Type of claim Compulsory Third Party 6( 9 ) Work Cover 10( 16 ) Other 3( 5 ) Engaged a legal representation(yes) 3( 5 ) Stress related to the claim process (high), n = 19 10(53) Stress related to the claim duration (high), n = 19 7( 37 ) Perceived support from family (high), n = 62 53(85.5) Perceived support from employer (high), n = 61 44(70) Perceived support from health professional (high), n = 52 33(63.5) Perceived support from insurance case manager (high), n = 44 18( 41 ) Health and work-related information Mean (SD), range No. (%) Recovery expectations (high) 59(94) RTW expectations at 3 months (high) 50(79) RTW expectations at 6 months (high) 53(84) Anxiety level (HADS) (elevated anxiety level) 22( 35 ) Depression level (HADS) (elevated depression level) 9( 14 ) Injustice Experience (IEQ- total score, clinically level of perceived injustice) 6(9.5) Impact of event scale (IESR- total score, PTSD symptoms) 19( 29 ) Resilience (BRS) (low) 24( 38 ) Perceived Threat to Life (low) 50(79) GPES score (-5: vastly worse, 5: vastly better) -1.1(2.3), (-5)-5 EQ-5d-VAS (0: best health, 100: worst health) 66( 19 ), 12–100 EQ-5d (index value), ((-1) – (+ 1)) 0.62(0.19), (-0.6,1) Pain and disability (ÖMPSQ), (0: lowest pain, 100: highest pain) 40.8(15.3), 13–76 Disability level (WHODAS), (0: highest functioning, 100: lowest functioning) 43.5( 16 ), 20–83 RTW = Return to work; HADS = The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; IEQ = The Injustice Experience Questionnaire; IESR = The Impact of Event Scale-Revised; BRS = The Brief Resilience Scale; GPES = the Global Perceived Effect; EQ-5D = The EuroQol 5 dimensions; VAS = Visual Analogue Scale; ÖMPSQ= Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire; WHODAS = World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule. 3.2. Vocational outcomes Participants’ vocational outcomes at baseline, six- and 12-months post baseline are presented in Table 3 . Sixty-seven percent (n = 42), 92% (n = 46), and 88% (n = 36) of participants reported returning to same job and same company or different job and/or different company at baseline, and six- and 12-months post-baseline, respectively. The mean of disability days recorded was 13 (SD = 10), 34 (SD = 50), 48 (SD = 93) days at baseline, and six, and 12 months of the baseline, respectively. On average, participants had worked 83 (SD = 65), 135 (SD = 64), and 127 (SD = 65) hours 4 weeks prior to completing the baseline and six-, and 12-months post-baseline surveys, respectively. At baseline 43% (n = 27) of the participants had used at least one type of job modifications to RTW whereas at six- and 12-months post-baseline 30 (n = 15) and 24 (n = 10) percent utilised modifications, respectively. Across the three time points, the mean of participants’ RTW self-efficacy score was approximately 6 from 2 to 10 (higher score demonstrated better self-efficacy). Of those who did RTW at baseline, and six- and 12 months from RTI, between 15% (n = 7) to 33% (n = 12) reported experiencing difficulty performing job duties at least half of time. The impact of injury on the work productivity of these participants decreased from 0.46 (SD = 0.31) at baseline to 0.15 (SD = 0.24) at 12-month assessment and their presenteeism at work increased from 67 (SD = 15) at baseline to 72 (SD = 9) at 12-months survey. Table 3 Participants’ vocational outcomes at baseline (n = 63), six (n = 50), and 12 (n = 41) months of the baseline assessment. Values are presented as mean (SD). Variable Baseline 6 months 12 months RTW status, No. (%) Returned to same job and same company 39(62) 39(78) 30(73) Returned to different job and/or different company 3( 5 ) 7( 14 ) 6( 15 ) Did not return to work 21( 33 ) 4( 8 ) 5( 12 ) Disability days, Mean (SD), range 13( 10 ),0–28 34( 50 ),0-210 48(93), 0-394 Work hours 4 weeks before the survey, Mean (SD), range 83(65), 0-190 135(64), 0-256 127(65), 0-240 RTW with job modification, No. (%) 27( 43 ) 15( 30 ) 10( 24 ) Fewer work hours 8( 13 ) 3( 6 ) 4( 10 ) More breaks during the workday 11( 17 ) 4( 8 ) 0 Flexible work schedule 8( 13 ) 0 3( 7 ) Reduce physical demand of the job 14( 22 ) 5( 10 ) 2( 5 ) Perform different duties/work tasks 7( 11 ) 5( 10 ) 1( 2 ) Ask others to assist with duties that cause pain 13( 20 ) 4( 8 ) 3( 7 ) Arrange for the use of a special chair, equipment, or tool 1( 2 ) 1( 2 ) 1( 2 ) Rearrange the workspace 3( 5 ) 1( 2 ) 1( 2 ) RTWSES* total score ( 2 – 10 ) 6.2(2.5), 1-9.6 6.2(2.8), 1-9.8 6(2.6),1-9.2 Supervisor domain 5( 3 ),1-9.5 4.6( 3 ),1–9 5.3( 3 ), 1-9.5 Pain domain 1.9(0.4), 1-2.5 2(0.4), 1.2–2.5 1.9(0.4), 1.2–2.5 Co-worker domain 4.6( 3 ), 1–9 5.2( 3 ), 1–8 5.4( 3 ), 1–8 Difficulty performing job duties* (WRFQ-total score), No. (%) 13( 31 ) 7( 15 ) 12( 33 ) Start the job as soon as arrived at work 9( 21 ) 4( 9 ) 8( 22 ) Do the work without making mistakes 10( 24 ) 8( 17 ) 12( 33 ) Repeat the same motions repeatedly while working 17( 40 ) 9( 19 ) 10( 27 ) Concentrate on the work 17( 40 ) 11( 24 ) 15( 41 ) Perform multiple tasks at the same time 19( 45 ) 9( 19 ) 12( 33 ) Impact on work productivity* (WPAI- work scale), Mean (SD), range 0.46(0.31), 0–1 0.17(0.25), 0-0.8 0.15(0.24), 0-0.8 Work performance * (WHO-HPQ) Absolute absenteeism 33( 51 ), (-50)-160 13(64), -128-280 10( 43 ), -77, 160 Absolute presenteeism 67( 15 ),20–90 69( 16 ), (-10)-90 72( 9 ),50–90 *Completed by those who had returned to work at baseline (n = 42), and 6 (n = 46) and 12 (n = 36) months post-baseline. RTW = Return to work; RTWSES = The Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy Scale; WPAI = Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire; WRFQ = Work Role Functioning Questionnaire; HPQ = Health and Work Performance Questionnaire. 3.3. RTW trajectories Figure 2 displays the pattern of the RTW trajectories in the study participants (n = 55). Individuals with less than 3 timepoints of data were removed (n = 8) to create a clearer picture of the trajectories. Overall, the graph shows even though most individuals did RTW with or without using work modifications (88%), around 13% (n = 8) had at least one RTW failure. Three general patterns were identified for participants who returned to work at baseline: (i) One-third of participants RTW at baseline without using any types of job modifications. Almost all of these participants continued working with some (~ 30%) needing to use work modifications to stay at work one year after RTI. (ii) One-third of participants required modification to their job to RTW at baseline. Half of these participants stayed at work without using any modifications whereas the remaining participants had to use at least one type of work modification temporarily or permanently to stay at work after one year. (iii) One-third reported not returning to work at baseline. Of these, the majority returned and stayed at work after one month of RTI with or without using job modifications. The proportion of off-work participants gradually decreased until reaching to around 2 percent (n = 1) towards the end of the study. 3.4. Predictors of two vocational outcomes (RTW status and disability days) Univariate analysis was used to identify associations between 47 baseline variables with RTW status and number of disability days at baseline, and six- and 12 months post-baseline. Ten variables were found to be significantly associated with RTW status at baseline (p value < 0.1) and were examined with binary logistic regression (see Supplementary Materials, Table A for detailed results). RTW at baseline was predicted by having lower severity of injury (i.e. soft tissue versus fracture/dislocation) and lower level of pain and disability (ÖMPSQ) (R 2 = 0.65, p < 0.05) (Table 4 ). At 6 months, of two variables entered in the regression analysis, only being younger predicted RTW (R 2 = 0.2, p < 0.05). At 12 months, being a casual/part-time employee was significantly associated with non-RTW whereas having higher annual income (over $ 51,999) was associated with RTW. Of these two variables, earning higher level of income predicted RTW at 12 months (R2 = 0.25, p < 0.05). Twenty-two variables were found to be correlated with higher number of disability days (see Supplementary Materials, Table B for detailed results)). Of these, having more disability days at baseline was predicted by (i) being male, (ii) being admitted to hospital after the RTI, (iii) sustaining a more severe injury (fracture/dislocation vs soft tissue), (iii) lodging a claim for compensation, (iv) having greater disability (WHODAS); and (v) greater feelings of distress related to intrusion (IESR- intrusion domain) (Table 4 ), (R 2 = 0.53, p < 0.05). At 6 months of the 12 variables included in the regression analysis, being older and having lower level of RTW self-efficacy at baseline predicted higher number of disability days (R 2 = 0.18, p < 0.05). At 12 months of the 8 variables entered in the regression analysis, four predicted higher number of disability days at 12 months. These were: (i) being older, (ii) having lower level of education (secondary vs tertiary), (iii) sustaining more severe injury (fracture/dislocation vs soft tissue), and (iiii) being in casual employment pre-injury (R 2 = 0.29, p < 0.05). Table 4 Multivariable logistic and linear regression models predicting RTW, number of disability days and work hours at baseline, and 6 months and 12 months post-baseline. Reference group in parentheses. R 2 B Exp(B) SE P value 95%CI RTW status 1 Baseline (n = 63) 0.65 Type of injury (fracture/dislocation) -1.9 0.14 0.67 0.004 0.03–0.52 ÖMPSQ score -0.06 0.94 0.02 0.008 0.89–0.98 6 months (n = 50) 0.2 Age -0.11 0.89 0.06 0.08 0.78–1.04 12 months (n = 41) 0.25 Annual income pre-injury (over $51,999) 2.48 12 1.1 0.03 0.1.18–121.8 Disability days 2 Baseline (n = 63) 0.53 Gender (male) 3.9 1.7 0.02 0.44–7.4 Hospital admission (yes) 6.01 1.8 0.002 2.3–9.6 Type of injury (fracture) 5.2 1.9 0.008 1.3–9.1 Lodge a claim (yes) 4.3 1.9 0.02 0.6–8.1 Disability level (WHODAS) 0.16 0.06 0.008 0.04–0.29 Impact of injury (IESR_ Intrusion) 2.6 1.003 0.01 0.57–4.5 6 months (n = 50) 0.18 Age 1.1 0.49 0.01 0.2–2.1 RTW-Self efficacy (Pain) -8.01 4.02 0.05 -16.1- 0.08 12 months (n = 41) 0.29 Age 2.1 0.94 0.03 0.11–4.004 Education (secondary) -50.6 28.5 0.08 -111.5-7.2 Type of injury (fracture) 47.8 27.9 0.09 -8.9-109.8 Employment status (casual/part-time) 34.02 16.1 0.04 1.2–70.8 ÖMPSQ= Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire; WHODAS = World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule; IESR = The Impact of Event Scale-Revised. 1 Binary Logistic Regression analysis; 2 Stepwise multivariate Linear Regression analysis. 4. Discussion The aim of this study was to quantify a set of vocational outcomes after RTI; to explore RTW trajectories over 12 months; and to identify predictors of RTW status and disability days at baseline, six and 12 months post-RTI. Thirty-three percent of participants did not RTW at baseline (n = 21) and around 10% at six- (n = 4) and 12-months (n = 5) post-baseline. The mean disability days was 48 (SD = 93) one year after RTI. Participants had different RTW trajectories with most using at least one type of work modification to return/stay at work, and around 13% having at least one RTW failure one year from their RTI. RTW at baseline was predicted by lower severity of injury, lower level of pain and disability, and younger age; at 6 months by being a casual/part-time employee, and at 12 months by earning higher level of income pre-injury. Having more disability days was predicted at baseline by being male, being admitted to hospital, sustaining a more severe injury, lodging a claim for compensation, having greater disability; and greater feelings of distress related to intrusion; at 6 months by being older and having lower level of RTW self-efficacy; and at 12 months by being older, having lower level of education, sustaining more severe injury, and being in a casual employment pre-injury. This study provided a comprehensive understanding of the RTW process following mild to serious RTI through the application of multiple vocational outcome measures over a one-year period. Overall, 88% of participants in this study returned to work one year after the RTI. This rate aligns with previously reported RTW rates for mild to serious RTI, which range from 78% to 95% ( 13 , 14 , 38 – 43 ). Although there was a gradual improvement in work performance and a reduction in impaired work productivity over time, findings indicated that 17% of those who returned to work were not employed in their pre-injury role or job one year after the injury (Table 3 ). Additionally, measuring the number of disability days revealed that some individuals continued to require time off work due to recurrence or exacerbation of their RTI, even after initially returning. These findings reinforce that first RTW alone is not an adequate indicator of vocational outcome ( 12 , 44 ) and highlight the importance of using multiple, longitudinal measures to capture the complex and ongoing impact of RTI on work participation. Visualising RTW patterns over the 12-month period revealed heterogeneous RTW trajectories, similar to those previously reported in individuals with musculoskeletal work-related injuries ( 45 ). While most participants had returned to work by 12 months post-injury, approximately one in eight (13%) were not in sustained employment. To our knowledge, the only other study investigating RTW patterns after RTI was conducted by Gray et al. ( 10 ). Their study used claimants’ income replacement data derived from an insurance company database, finding that 17% (n = 5401) of participants had at least one RTW failure two years post-injury. Differences between studies likely reflect variations in follow-up duration and outcome measurement approaches. In the present study, RTW status by timepoint (Table 3 ) and individual RTW trajectories (Fig. 2 ) showed that early RTW was predominantly with modifications during the first month following the crash, followed by a progressive shift toward RTW without modifications over subsequent months. This pattern indicates that early access to suitable work modifications supports both initial RTW and sustained participation in the workforce. These findings underscore the significance of work modification availability, particularly during the early post-injury phase, in facilitating a successful RTW. This is especially relevant in jurisdictions with fault-based compensation schemes, where employers are not legally obligated to offer modified duties to employees recovering from non–work-related RTI. Future studies should examine what educational, financial, or legal supports could be provided to employers to encourage early, modified RTW opportunities for this group. This study showed that the predictive strength of vocational outcome measures (i.e., RTW status and number of disability days) varied over time within the same population. RTW status demonstrated relatively stronger predictive strength compared with disability days. Although the number of predictors in the final models differed between the two outcome measures, the most common baseline predictors were related to physical health. Specifically, individuals with more severe injuries, greater levels of pain and disability, and older age were less likely to RTW and more likely to record a higher number of disability days. This finding aligns with a systematic review reporting strong evidence for an association between better health status and improved RTW outcomes after mild to serious RTI ( 7 ). However, contrary to that review, the present study found that older age was associated with poorer RTW outcomes, consistent with other studies showing that prolonged work disability (assessed by different measures) tends to be more pronounced in older workers ( 14 , 46 , 47 ). These findings highlight the importance of providing timely and appropriate interventions particularly within the first month following RTI to optimise recovery and support early RTW ( 48 ). Beyond the early phase, key predictors at six and twelve months were primarily work-related: participants in casual or part-time employment were less likely to RTW at six months and more likely to report more disability days at twelve months, whereas higher pre-injury income predicted RTW. These results are consistent with Prang et al. ( 49 ), although Murgatroyd et al. ( 50 ) reported no association between income/employment status and time to RTW following orthopaedic RTI; discrepancies may reflect sample composition and predictor categorisation, with Murgatroyd et al. including a larger proportion of severe–critical injuries. These results point to a staged, systems-oriented approach to RTW after RTI. In the first month, timely rehabilitation and early coordination with employers to trial temporary work modifications may help facilitate initial RTW. From six to twelve months, attention could increasingly shift toward workplace solutions (e.g., job redesign, flexible scheduling) and targeted support for workers in insecure or part-time employment. Ongoing communication among workers, clinicians, and employers appears likely to support sustained participation. In fault-based schemes, mechanisms that enable or incentivise early employer engagement and low-cost modifications may be beneficial. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that provided a holistic picture of vocational outcomes after one year of mild to serious RTI. Different vocational outcome measures used in this study served as a basis to compare the appropriateness of each measure in indicating possible impacts of RTI on work within a single population. Visualisation of RTW trajectories highlighted the necessity of work modification in RTW process leading to introducing a current system-related gap associated with unavailability of employers’ support for those with non-work-related RTI in a fault-based scheme. In addition, this study found that some people may experience one or multiple RTW failures following their first RTW. Future studies are needed to identify group based RTW trajectories using new statistical methods and predictors of these trajectories. The multidimensional nature of data (health, work, and system-related factors) collected in this study resulted in identifying some important predictors of vocational outcomes following RTI which can be considered in developing future RTW interventions. A limitation of this study was the small sample size and the relatively high attrition rate across follow-ups. The main reason for this attrition was difficulty in re-contacting participants after discharge, particularly those with minor injuries who often recovered quickly and perceived little ongoing benefit in continued participation. This challenge is well-documented in longitudinal studies recruiting from emergency departments, where attrition rates of up to 55% have been reported in studies of patients after severe injury ( 51 ). Despite this limitation, the overall trends and associations observed in this study were consistent with findings from larger cohorts, supporting the robustness of the results. Declarations There are no conflicts of interests to declare. This project was conducted as part of the PhD project of Masoumeh Abedi (first author). She was supported by The University of Queensland Research Training Scholarship. The project received funding from the Motor Accident Insurance Commission (MAIC). Clinical trial number not applicable Human Ethics and Consent to Participate declarations please see sections 2.3 and 2.4 Author Contribution Masoumeh Abedi: Methodology; Investigation; Data curation; Formal analysis; Project administration; Writing- Original draft preparation; Writing- Reviewing and Editing.Tammy Aplin: Supervision; Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation; Data curation; Formal analysis; Writing original draft; Writing- Reviewing and Editing.Elise Gane: Supervision; Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation; Data curation; Formal analysis; Writing original draft; Writing- Reviewing and Editing.Venerina Johnston: Supervision; Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation; References Litchfield F. The cost of road crashes in Australia 2016: An overview of safety strategies. Canberra: The Australian National University; 2017. Road traffic injuries WHO [updated 21 June. 2021. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries Vos T, Lim SS, Abbafati C, Abbas KM, Abbasi M, Abbasifard M, et al. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204–22. Steinhauser R, Lancsar E. Social Cost of Road Crashes: Report for the Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics. Australia: Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics; 2022. September 2022. Peolsson A, Hermansen A, Peterson G, Nilsing Strid E. Return to work a bumpy road: a qualitative study on experiences of work ability and work situation in individuals with chronic whiplash-associated disorders. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):785. Gray SE, Hassani-Mahmooei B, Kendall E, Cameron ID, Kenardy J, Collie A. Factors associated with graduated return to work following injury in a road traffic crash. J Transp Health. 2018;10:167–77. Abedi M, Gane E, Aplin T, Zerguine H, Johnston V. Barriers and Facilitators Associated with Return to Work Following Minor to Serious Road Traffic Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Systematic Review. J Occup Rehabil. 2021. Cassidy JD, Carroll LJ, Côté P, Lemstra M, Berglund A, Nygren Å. Effect of Eliminating Compensation for Pain and Suffering on the Outcome of Insurance Claims for Whiplash Injury. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(16):1179–86. Leth-Petersen S, Rotger GP. Long-term labour-market performance of whiplash claimants. J Health Econ. 2009;28(5):996–1011. Gray SE, Hassani-Mahmooei B, Cameron ID, Kendall E, Kenardy J, Collie A. Patterns and Predictors of Failed and Sustained Return-to-Work in Transport Injury Insurance Claimants. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28(4):740–8. Lau G, Gabbe BJ, Collie A, Ponsford J, Ameratunga S, Cameron PA, et al. The Association Between Fault Attribution and Work Participation After Road Traffic Injury: A Registry-Based Observational Study. J Occup Rehabil. 2020;30(2):235–54. Fitzharris M, Bowman D, Ludlow K. Factors associated with return-to-work and health outcomes among survivors of road crashes in Victoria. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2010;34(2):153–9. Gopinath B, Jagnoor J, Harris IA, Nicholas M, Casey P, Blyth F, et al. Prognostic indicators of social outcomes in persons who sustained an injury in a road traffic crash. Injury. 2015;46(5):909–17. Gopinath B, Jagnoor J, Elbers N, Cameron IDJBRN. Overview of findings from a 2-year study of claimants who had sustained a mild or moderate injury in a road traffic crash: prospective study. 2017;10(1):76. Abedi M, Aplin T, Gane E, Johnston V. Exploring the perspectives of key stakeholders in returning to work after minor to serious road traffic injuries: a qualitative study. J Occup Rehabil. 2023;33(1):93–106. Abedi M, Aplin T, Gane E, Johnston V. No Man’s Land: the experiences of persons injured in a road traffic crash wanting to return to work in Queensland, Australia. Disabil Rehabil. 2024;46(1):48–57. Adams H, Ellis T, Stanish WD, Sullivan MJ. Psychosocial factors related to return to work following rehabilitation of whiplash injuries. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17(2):305–15. Schultz IZ, Stowell AW, Feuerstein M, Gatchel RJ. Models of return to work for musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17(2):327–52. Gane EM, Smits EJ, Brakenridge CL, Gangathimmaiah V, Jagnoor J, Cameron ID, et al. Functional and employment outcomes following road traffic crashes in Queensland, Australia: Protocol for a prospective cohort study. J Transp Health. 2019;15:100678. Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. PharmacoEconomics. 1993;4:353–65. Kessler RC, Ames M, Hymel PA, Loeppke R, McKenas D, Richling D, et al. Using the WHO Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ) to evaluate the indirect workplace costs of illness. J Occup Environ Med. 2004;46(Suppl 6):S23–37. Kessler RC, Barber C, Beck AL, Berglund PA, Cleary PD, McKenas D, et al. The World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ). J Occup Environ Med. 2003;45(2):156–74. Abma F, Bjorner JB, Amick BC 3rd, Bultmann U. Two valid and reliable work role functioning questionnaire short versions were developed: WRFQ 5 and WRFQ 10. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;105:101–11. Abma FI, Bultmann U, Amick Iii BC, Arends I, Dorland HF, Flach PA, et al. The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire v2.0 Showed Consistent Factor Structure Across Six Working Samples. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28(3):465–74. Brouwer S, Franche R-L, Hogg-Johnson S, Lee H, Krause N, Shaw W. Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy: Development and Validation of a Scale in Claimants with Musculoskeletal Disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):244–58. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen MF, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation -. Official J Int Soc Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36. Linton SJ, MacDonald S, Nicholas M. Development of a short form of the Örebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire. Spine. 2011;36(22):1891–5. Saltychev M, Mattie R, McCormick Z, Laimi K. Confirmatory factor analysis of 12-Item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in patients with musculoskeletal pain conditions. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31(5):702–9. Kamper SJ, Ostelo RW, Knol DL, Maher CG, de Vet HC, Hancock MJ. Global Perceived Effect scales provided reliable assessments of health transition in people with musculoskeletal disorders, but ratings are strongly influenced by current status. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2010;63(7):760-6.e1. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67(6):361–70. Johnston M, Pollard B, Hennessey P. Construct validation of the hospital anxiety and depression scale with clinical populations. J Psychosom Res. 2000;48(6):579–84. Mykletun A, Stordal E, Dahl AA. Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale: factor structure, item analyses and internal consistency in a large population. Br J Psychiatry. 2001;179:540–4. Weiss DS. The Impact of Event Scale-Revised. In: Assessing Psychological Trauma and PTSD,. 2nd Edition, editor. New York, : The Guilford Press,; 2004. Sullivan M, Adams H, Horan S, Maher D, Boland D, Gross R. The Role of Perceived Injustice in the Experience of Chronic Pain and Disability: Scale Development and Validation. J Occup Rehabil. 2008;18(3):249–61. Smith B, Dalen J, Wiggins K, Tooley E, Christopher P, Bernard J. The brief resilience scale: Assessing the ability to bounce back. Int J Behav Med. 2008;15(3):194–200. Holbrook LT, Hoyt BD, Stein BM, Sieber JW. Perceived Threat to Life Predicts Posttraumatic Stress Disorder after Major Trauma: Risk Factors and Functional Outcome. J Trauma: Injury Infect Crit Care. 2001;51(2):287–93. Voorhis C, Morgan B. Understanding Power and Rules of Thumb for Determining Sample Size. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology. 2007. Ruffolo CF, Friedland JF, Dawson DR, Colantonio A, Lindsay PH. Mild traumatic brain injury from motor vehicle accidents: factors associated with return to work. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(4):392–8. Ebel BE, Mack C, Diehr P, Rivara FP. Lost working days, productivity, and restraint use among occupants of motor vehicles that crashed in the United States. Inj Prev. 2004;10(5):314–9. Fort E, Bouffard E, Charnay P, Bernard M, Boisson D, Laumon B, et al. Return to work following road accidents: factors associated with late work resumption. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(4):283–91. Beck B, Ekegren CL, Cameron P, Edwards ER, Bucknill A, Judson R, et al. Predictors of recovery in cyclists hospitalised for orthopaedic trauma following an on-road crash. Accid Anal Prev. 2017;106:341–7. Geldman M, Moore A, Cheek L. The effect of pre-injury physical fitness on the initial severity and recovery from whiplash injury, at six-month follow-up. 2008;22(4):364–76. Heron-Delaney M, Warren J, Kenardy JA. Predictors of non-return to work 2 years post-injury in road traffic crash survivors: Results from the UQ SuPPORT study. Injury. 2017;48(6):1120–8. Butler RJ, Johnson WG, Baldwin ML. Managing Work Disability: Why First Return to Work is Not a Measure of Success. ILR Rev. 1995;48(3):452–69. McLeod CB, Reiff E, Maas E. Bültmann UJSJoW, Environment, Health. Identifying return-to-work trajectories using sequence analysis in a cohort of workers with work-related musculoskeletal disorders. 2018(2):147–55. Buitenhuis J, de Jong PJ, Jaspers JP, Groothoff JW. Work disability after whiplash: a prospective cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(3):262–7. Berecki-Gisolf J, Clay FJ, Collie A, McClure RJ. Predictors of Sustained Return to Work After Work-Related Injury or Disease: Insights from Workers’ Compensation Claims Records. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(3):283–91. Clay FJ, Newstead SV, Watson WL, McClure RJ. Determinants of return to work following non life threatening acute orthopaedic trauma: a prospective cohort study. J Rehabil Med. 2010;42(2):162–9. Prang KH, Berecki-Gisolf J, Newnam S. Recovery from musculoskeletal injury: the role of social support following a transport accident. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13:97. Murgatroyd DF, Harris IA, Tran Y, Cameron ID, Murgatroyd D. Predictors of return to work following motor vehicle related orthopaedic trauma. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:171. Nishi D, Matsuoka Y, Nakajima S, Noguchi H, Kim Y, Kanba S, et al. Are patients after severe injury who drop out of a longitudinal study at high risk of mental disorder? Compr Psychiatr. 2008;49(4):393–8. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementaryMaterials.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 30 Apr, 2026 Read the published version in Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 16 Feb, 2026 Reviews received at journal 15 Feb, 2026 Reviews received at journal 26 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Dec, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 12 Dec, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 12 Dec, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 11 Dec, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 11 Dec, 2025 First submitted to journal 30 Nov, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8246087","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":561889692,"identity":"960a3775-e739-42f4-b7f5-7179a4874dca","order_by":0,"name":"Masoumeh Abedi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of the Sunshine Coast","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Masoumeh","middleName":"","lastName":"Abedi","suffix":""},{"id":561889693,"identity":"581a8c3c-3604-4144-97f4-a5b5b7242dc4","order_by":1,"name":"Tammy Aplin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Queensland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tammy","middleName":"","lastName":"Aplin","suffix":""},{"id":561889694,"identity":"1fed9029-0b10-4a51-91a7-71b4c252154a","order_by":2,"name":"Elise Gane","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Queensland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Elise","middleName":"","lastName":"Gane","suffix":""},{"id":561889695,"identity":"eebc1362-a6d0-44b3-9cb1-c52be59b477c","order_by":3,"name":"Venerina Johnston","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Southern Queensland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Venerina","middleName":"","lastName":"Johnston","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-12-01 04:53:08","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8246087/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8246087/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-026-10380-0","type":"published","date":"2026-04-30T15:57:26+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":98753050,"identity":"2d1031f6-f930-4d06-b809-845cd10991a3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 09:20:06","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":325524,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Manuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/612099b64ec1d3a4dddb2dbc.docx"},{"id":98753049,"identity":"3d919f4b-4b9a-4f3a-9ca8-3f29a014dee2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 09:20:06","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":6414,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"9abeb1308d1149899769bfc1a29ed782.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/1cd438c1acad9d7a12e00731.json"},{"id":98753051,"identity":"ece0b511-b03a-4d2d-9c25-37e718d35aa9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 09:20:06","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":193450,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"9abeb1308d1149899769bfc1a29ed7821enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/3ef8b00b901f5b175f3be2f8.xml"},{"id":98779803,"identity":"c682a36c-22ca-4e65-95b1-5a58e886ae0e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 12:30:47","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":52109,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/d58c2bed96c6be5c9836a092.png"},{"id":98778321,"identity":"1cf2ef9f-9ae7-4ebe-bcbe-e3ecd79910f1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 12:29:09","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":51866,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/eea3319276125c66ca18b325.png"},{"id":98753056,"identity":"62177a99-f0ea-4b8c-8e3a-ebf03c19fddd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 09:20:06","extension":"xml","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":190973,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"9abeb1308d1149899769bfc1a29ed7821structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/3c0178fd41620db9a1b8b849.xml"},{"id":98753053,"identity":"98acb22d-a965-4ad2-81ea-962db129507b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 09:20:06","extension":"html","order_by":8,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":212258,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/2456b0835a6afdee41c68de3.html"},{"id":98778226,"identity":"2bd932c9-8dfc-4f6a-930b-5ed9be756c3b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 12:29:02","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":153618,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFlow chart of sample size and drop-outs at 9 timepoints.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/cd9fc167bc715d1e183e96af.jpeg"},{"id":98753052,"identity":"ba3a727b-a908-4aa5-8103-72806670e371","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 09:20:06","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":103052,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eRTW transversal state distributions within one year of RTI (n=55), M= Month\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/ab483e0f971b228831edd241.jpeg"},{"id":108437600,"identity":"68fff162-4dde-4673-bb6e-89c4ecb88390","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-04 16:00:00","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":938090,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/a7301153-45c3-43f3-8462-24ceb5867292.pdf"},{"id":98753048,"identity":"c97f3794-5a31-4007-aec9-4024a8d5f4dd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-22 09:20:06","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":20208,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementaryMaterials.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8246087/v1/c3084c4842b8ea8814327c44.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Trajectory and predictors of return-to-work outcomes for people after a road traffic injury: A prospective cohort study","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eRoad traffic crashes are a major global concern, costing countries an estimated 2\u0026ndash;5% of their gross domestic product, with the relative burden generally higher in low- and middle-income countries than in high-income settings (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Around 50\u0026nbsp;million people experience a Road Traffic Injury (RTI) every year (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). These injuries were the main cause of global disease burden (as measured by disability-adjusted life year) for individuals aged 10\u0026ndash;49 years between 1990 and 2019 (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Disability from RTI results in considerable economic burden for societies. In Australia, RTIs cost about AU\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e11.8\u0026nbsp;billion annually between 2016 and 2020, including AU\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e2.3\u0026nbsp;billion in medical costs and AU\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e1.54\u0026nbsp;billion in disability-related expenses (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, reduced work ability due to RTI is reported to negatively influence the injured persons\u0026rsquo; health condition, financial situation, their family and workplace (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). On the other hand, return to work (RTW) is associated with an increase in the injured persons\u0026rsquo; confidence while decreasing their dependence on social support (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). For this reason, RTW is considered a critical milestone in the rehabilitation process. Therefore, obtaining a better understanding of the factors impacting RTW following RTI is critical in working towards the recovery of injured individuals and reducing the associated personal and societal costs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA broad range of factors potentially influencing RTW following RTI have been examined in the literature. A recent systematic review of studies published between 1997 and 2020, covering 11 studies from Australia, the UK, Canada, and Denmark, found strong evidence that better health status and higher RTW expectancy predict earlier RTW, with follow-up periods ranging from one month to three years (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). The review also reported strong evidence for no association between RTW and demographic factors such as age or gender and found no consistent link with fault status. While these findings highlight the importance of health and individual expectations, they also point to a relative lack of attention to system-related influences. Consequently, there remains limited knowledge on the role of legal, insurance, workplace, and healthcare factors in shaping RTW outcomes after RTI. For instance, it is suggested that differences in compensation schemes may result in identifying different barriers and facilitators to RTW (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e). In Australia, the majority of studies that investigated these factors have been conducted in jurisdictions operating a \u0026lsquo;no-fault\u0026rsquo; scheme (6, 10\u0026ndash;12) in which injured individuals have access to medical and financial support regardless of their fault status in the crash. Therefore, the findings may not be generalizable to other states like Queensland that operate a \u0026ldquo;fault-based\u0026rdquo; scheme. In this scheme for nonwork-related RTI, only injured people who are not at fault in the crash are supported financially and medically through the Compulsory Third Party (CTP) insurer of the at-fault driver. This may lead at-fault individuals to experience other types of challenges like financial difficulties and stress arising from the claim process which have been shown can significantly influence work outcomes (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR14 CR15\" citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, there is a need to determine the factors associated with RTW after a RTI in a \u0026ldquo;fault-based\u0026rdquo; scheme.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt has been proposed that factors associated with RTW may vary with the way the concept of work is measured (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). Previous studies have often used dichotomous outcomes (RTW vs Not RTW), self-reported work disability days, or compensated days, with most utilising the date of first RTW as the main measure of RTW (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e). However, RTW is both an endpoint and a process (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e). According to previous findings, injured individuals may take different RTW trajectories after a RTI (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e). Earlier studies show large heterogeneity in RTW trajectories after RTI with some individuals requiring multiple RTW attempts and periods of time away from work (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e). This suggests that depending on individual variations, more or different interventions may be needed to facilitate RTW following RTI. However, so far only a few studies investigated the RTW trajectory of injured people following RTI (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). To address the knowledge gaps, a prospective cohort study was conducted in Queensland, Australia to better understand the impact of road traffic crashes on RTW of injured people using different work outcome measures assessed repeatedly within one year of RTI. The objectives of this study were to:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003equantify the impact of RTI on a set of vocational outcomes (e.g., RTW status, number of disability days, lost work hours, RTW self-efficacy, work productivity and performance) at baseline, six months, and 12 months post-injury\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eexplore the RTW trajectories of injured persons over 12 months following their RTI; and\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eidentify predictors of RTW status and disability days at baseline, six months, and 12 months post-RTI.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"2. Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Study design and Setting\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study was a longitudinal inception cohort study, with the protocol published previously (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e). For the present analysis, only those who were working pre-injury were included. The study was conducted in Queensland, the third most populous state in Australia with a population of over 5\u0026nbsp;million.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndividuals who had been injured in a road traffic crash in the previous 28 days formed the study cohort. The study sample included both compensable (within a fault-based scheme) and non-compensable participants to capture the experiences of all individuals affected by RTI. To be eligible to participate, individuals must: (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) have been aged 18\u0026ndash;64 years; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) have sustained a mild or moderate injury as the result of a road traffic crash for which the individual had sought advice from a medical practitioner or other healthcare provider; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) have been injured due to a crash involving a motorised vehicle on land in Queensland; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) have been a driver, rider, passenger, pillion passenger, cyclist, or pedestrian in the crash; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) have proficient English language skills to understand and complete the questionnaire as well as the consent form. Participants were excluded if: (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) their injury had occurred as a result of a crash involving other types of land transport (e.g. trains and light rail, or bicycle) without the involvement of a motorised vehicle; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) they had sustained a severe injury, including severe traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, extensive burns or multiple amputations; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) had an injury requiring hospitalisation for more than 10 days; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) had sustained an injury that occurred as a result of intentional self-harm; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) had dementia or significant cognitive impairment affecting their ability to provide informed consent.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Ethical clearance\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003e was granted from the Townsville Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (reference HREC/18/QTHS/131) and The University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (reference 2018001693) in accordance with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Recruitment and consent\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eElectronic medical records within emergency departments at the Townsville Hospital and Princess Alexandra Hospital were screened on a weekly basis for potential participants. An introductory letter and the participant information and consent form were posted to potential participants to inform them that the research team would contact them regarding this study. Patients were then followed up via telephone to discuss participation, confirm eligibility and to obtain verbal consent. Upon obtaining the verbal consent, participants received online or hard copy versions of the consent form and questionnaires depending on their preference. For those who preferred to receive hard-copy questionnaires via post, a reply-paid envelope was also included for the return of the completed forms. All participants provided verbal and written informed consent. To minimise selection bias, consistent screening procedures and inclusion criteria were applied across both sites, ensuring systematic identification of eligible participants. The use of multiple modes of questionnaire delivery (online and postal) helped to improve accessibility and reduce non-response bias.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5. Data collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecruitment occurred between October 2018 to September 2019 and data collection completed in September 2020. Data were collected using a series of self-reported questionnaires at 9 timepoints, including baseline (within 28 days of the road traffic crash), and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12 months post-baseline. The questionnaires took approximately 20\u0026ndash;25 minutes to be completed, and participants were reimbursed \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e25 after the completion of the baseline, 6 month and 12-month questionnaires. Questionnaire data was managed within an online service called REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5.1. Measures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section4\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5.1.1. Outcome measures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTwo vocational outcomes were assessed at each timepoint.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eRTW status\u003c/b\u003e- RTW status was used as a primary outcome, defined as a binary variable (Yes/No). Participants were asked whether they had successfully returned to work (Yes) or had not returned (No).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eNumber of disability days\u003c/b\u003e- At each timepoint, participants reported their RTW date, whether they had left their job since the last survey, and the number of workdays lost due to their RTI. Disability days were calculated as the total time off work, combining days absent before initial RTW with any additional sick leave days taken after RTW.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section4\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5.1.2. Predictors\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eSocio-demographics and pre-injury health status\u003c/b\u003e- at baseline participants were asked about their socio-demographic information, including age, gender, level of education, marital status, pre-injury job (e.g., type of occupation, employment status, the extent to which their job was physically/mentally demanding, and annual salary), and whether they had a comorbidity (i.e., arthritis, asthma, back pain, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or a mental health condition).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eCrash-and injury-related measures\u003c/b\u003e \u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e At baseline, participants self-reported information associated with their crash (i.e. their role in the crash), and their injury such as the diagnosis/es of injury, if they were admitted to hospital, the number of nights stayed in the hospital, if they took medication or received any treatments (i.e., Physiotherapy/ Exercise/ Ergonomics and Occupational Therapy/ Chiropractic treatment/ Acupuncture/ Osteopathy/ Psychological counselling/ Remedial massage/other), and if they received a medical certificate to RTW.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eWork-related measures\u003c/b\u003e- Those who did RTW were asked if they returned to the same position and same company or a different position and/or different company. They were also asked if they had made any types of modifications at work (i.e., fewer working hours, more breaks during the workday, flexible work schedule, reduce physical demands of the job, perform different duties/work tasks, ask others to assist with duties, use assistive devices/tools, rearrange the workspace). In addition, participants were asked about the degree to which their post-injury job is mentally/physically demanding. To indicate the quality of RTW, a few questions taken from the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire v2.0 (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e) and the World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e) were used to assess absolute absenteeism and presenteeism at work. Furthermore, Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 5-item version (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e) was used to assess the impaired workability. Finally, self-efficacy regarding RTW was assessed using a 10-item scale derived from the Return to Work Self-Efficacy Scale (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e). This scale consists of three factors: ability to cope with pain, receiving help from supervisor, and receiving help from co-workers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eQuality of life\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e The EuroQol 5 dimensions 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e) was used to measure quality of life. The participants were asked to report their health state by indicating their level of difficulty in each of the five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). They also self-rated their health status on a vertical visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). EQ-5D- VAS score and EQ-5D utility score (total score) were used.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePain\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e The 10-item \u0026Ouml;rebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (\u0026Ouml;MPSQ)- Short-form (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e) was used to assess the physical and functional level and adjustment to injury and pain. The tool consists of five domains: pain; self-perceived function; distress; RTW expectancy; and fear avoidance beliefs. The \u0026Ouml;MPSQ total score ranges between 1 and 100 with higher scores indicating greater disability. Responses to two questions regarding RTW expectancy were also reported. Participants were asked to indicate the chances of being able to work in three and six months from 0 (no chance) to 10 (very large chance).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eDisability\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e The level of disability due to the RTI was measured using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule version 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e). This tool consists of 12 items assessing activity limitations and participation restrictions (i.e., disability) in the prior month. Disability was assessed across six domains: understanding and communicating; getting around; self-care; getting along with people; life activities (i.e., household, work, and/or school activities); and participation in society. WHODAS summary score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 100 (full disability) was reported.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eGlobal Perceived Effect (GPE) scale\u003c/b\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e)- Participants rated their current health status compared to immediately before their RTI. This is an 11-point numerical scale ranging from \u0026ldquo;-5\u0026rdquo; (Vastly worse) to \u0026ldquo;5\u0026rdquo; (Vastly better). Unchanged health would be rated as \u0026ldquo;0\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAnxiety and depression\u003c/b\u003e- The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e) is a reliable tool (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e), consisting of 14-items evaluating depression and anxiety symptoms in the past week. Anxiety and depression are measured by seven questions each, which produce sub-scale scores that are summed to produce a total score. \u0026lsquo;Cases\u0026rsquo; of depression or anxiety are defined as a sub-scale score of 11 to 21.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eThe Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R)\u003c/b\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e) is a self-report measure used to assesses subjective distress resulted from traumatic events. This tool includes 22 items asking participants to rate their degree of distress during the past week on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). Subscale scores can be produced for avoidance, intrusion, and hyper-arousal. The mean of each subscale was used in the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eThe Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ)\u003c/b\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e) is a 12-item scale used to enquire about the frequency of experiencing a sense of unfairness regarding the sustained injury on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (all the time). The IEQ provides two correlated factors of severity/irreparability of loss, and blame/unfairness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eThe Brief Resilience Scale (BRS)\u003c/b\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e) is a questionnaire used to assess the ability of the participants to recover from stress. The tool includes six items asking participants to indicate their level of agreement with each item on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The sum of the 6 item scores produces a total score between 6 (low resilience) and 30 (high resilience).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePerceived threat to life\u003c/b\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e) is used to predict post-traumatic stress disorder onset and early symptoms of acute stress reaction (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e). Participants are asked \"How much did you believe you were going to die during the accident?\" and rate their response on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very strongly).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eSystem-related measures\u003c/b\u003e \u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e Participants indicated the degree to which their family, employers, health professionals, and insurance case managers was supportive when attempting to RTW on a 7 -point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). They also indicated if they lodged a claim for compensation or engaged legal representation. Those who reported lodging a claim were asked to rate the degree of stress associated with the navigation and duration of the claim from 1 (a little stressful) to 5 (extremely stressful). Receipt of medical certificate at the time of RTI was also assessed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5.2. Sample size\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt was determined that a sample of 60 participants would be required for this study. This sample size was based on the anticipated number of predictors to be included in the final regression modelling. For regression equations using six or more predictors, an absolute minimum of 10 participants per predictor variable is considered appropriate (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5.3. Statistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data were cleaned and analysed in SPSS version 28 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). Summary statistics were utilised to describe the characteristics of participants who completed the baseline survey. Specifically, we used frequencies and percentages for categorical data and means and standard deviations for continuous data. Differences between respondents vs non-respondents at one, six, and 12-months post-baseline (major drop-out times) were assessed with Fisher\u0026rsquo;s Exact test for categorical variables, and Mann-Witney test for continuous variables due to non-normal distribution of data (P value\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMultivariate regression analysis was used to determine which baseline factors predict RTW status and number of disability days at baseline, and six- and 12-months post-baseline. Firstly, the association between the independent baseline factors and dependent variables were assessed with a correlation matrix (Spearman Rank Bivariate Correlation Test). Independent baseline variables with a significant association of p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.1 were included in the multivariate regression model. A Binominal logistic regression model with backwards elimination was used to identify significant predictors of RTW status at baseline, and 6- and 12- months post baseline. The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) method was used to assess the fit of the final regression model, where a lower AIC score indicated a better model fit. Negelkerke R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e was used to compare the models with and without a predictor included. Predictors were kept in the model if the regression test had a result with p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05. To determine variables predicting number of disability days at baseline, and six- and 12-months post-baseline, baseline variables that were correlated with the dependant outcome (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.1), were entered in the multivariate regression model using backwards method. The presence of multi-collinearity was detected with the variance inflation factor (VIF): If 2 variables were highly correlated, only one was selected based on VIF\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;2. Additionally, the final model was determined after being checked by AIC score.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eOf 728 patients screened from the emergency department records, 127 eligible people responded to the invitation and consented to participate in this study (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Of those, 77 participants completed the baseline questionnaire (60%). As this study focused on work outcomes, participants not working pre-injury were not included in this study (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14). Hence, the results of this study are based on the subset of 63 participants who were employed prior to the injury. The lowest response rate throughout this study was for the final 12-month follow-up assessment (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41), bringing the retention rate to about 32% towards the end of study. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e illustrates the recruitment and sample size at all assessment timepoints. The main reason for the lost to follow up was inability of the researchers to make contact with these participants despite several attempts and using various modes of contact.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaseline characteristics and health status of respondents compared to non-respondents at six- and 12-months post-baseline is presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. No significant difference was observed between respondents and non-respondents\u0026rsquo; groups except for the level of education (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). At the six-month post-baseline assessment, the respondent group had significantly higher level of education compared to the non-respondent group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003echaracteristics compared to non-participants at six- and 12-months post-baseline\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipation at 6 months\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipation at 12 months\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNon-respondents\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;13)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRespondents (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;50)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNon-respondents\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;22)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRespondents (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge (years), Mean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41.8(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.4(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42.3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (female), No. (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarital status, No. (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMarried/de facto relationship\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSingle\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation level, No. (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTertiary education\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40(63)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e*\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16(25.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSecondary education\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8(12.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(15.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6(9.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComorbidities (Yes), No. (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6(9.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"8\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e Mann-Witney Test, \u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003eFisher\u0026rsquo;s Exact Test,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, NS not significant\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Baseline characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e shows the baseline characteristics of study participants (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;63). The mean age of participants was 41 years (range 18\u0026ndash;64 years, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14) of which 50% were women (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;31) and 56% were married or in a de-facto relationship (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;36). Over 70% of participants had a tertiary education (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;45). The most frequent type of jobs reported were managerial and professional jobs (43%, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;27).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlmost half of participants were admitted to hospital after their road traffic crash (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;30), and the most common type of injuries sustained were soft tissue injuries like whiplash (51%, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;32). One third of participants lodged a claim for compensation related to their RTI (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19) and around 50% of these participants reported experiencing high level of stress associated with the duration of the claim process. Most participants received a high level of support from their families (85%, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;53), treating health professionals (70%, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;44), and employers (63%, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;33).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe majority of participants reported a high level of recovery expectancy at baseline (94%, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;59). Around one-third of participants reported an elevated level of anxiety (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;22) and PTSD symptoms (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19). The resilience level was low for 38% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;24) of participants. Quality of life, measured with the EQ-5D index, averaged\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.60 (scale \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1 to 1). Baseline pain and disability, assessed using the \u0026Ouml;MPSQ and WHODAS, had mean scores\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;40 on both instruments (0\u0026ndash;100; higher scores indicate greater pain/disability).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSample characteristics at baseline assessment (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;63)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSociodemographic information\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean (SD), range\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo. (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e), 18\u0026ndash;64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender \u003cem\u003e(female)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarital status (\u003cem\u003eMarried/de facto relationship)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35(56)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation level \u003cem\u003e(tertiary education (i.e., university degree, diploma, certificate I-IV)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45(71)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-injury occupation type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eManager/ Professional\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTechnician/trade worker\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCommunity/personal service worker\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAdministrative worker/sale worker/ Machinery operator/driver\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-injury employment status\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSelf-employed\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFull time\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38(60)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePart time\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCasual employment\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePhysically demanding pre-injury job (high)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37(59)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMentally demanding pre-injury job (high)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e56(89)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnnual salary pre-injury (\u003cem\u003e$51,999 or more)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42(67)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHaving comorbidities pre-injury\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRoad traffic crash and injury -related information\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean (SD), range\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo. (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRoad user type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDriver\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28(44.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRider (on a motorbike)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28(44.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePassenger/ Pedestrian/cyclist\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdmitted to hospital (yes)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHospital stays (nights)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTaking medication post-injury (yes)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e56(89)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReceived treatment (yes)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44(70)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType of injury\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSoft tissue including whiplash\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDislocation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFracture\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReceived medical certificate(yes)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49(78)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLodge a claim for compensation (yes)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType of claim\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCompulsory Third Party\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWork Cover\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEngaged a legal representation(yes)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStress related to the claim process (high), n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(53)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStress related to the claim duration (high), n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived support from family (high), n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53(85.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived support from employer (high), n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44(70)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived support from health professional (high), n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33(63.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived support from insurance case manager (high), n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eHealth and work-related information\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean (SD), range\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo. (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecovery expectations (high)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59(94)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRTW expectations at 3 months (high)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50(79)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRTW expectations at 6 months (high)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53(84)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnxiety level (HADS) (elevated anxiety level)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDepression level (HADS) (elevated depression level)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInjustice Experience (IEQ- total score, clinically level of perceived injustice)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6(9.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImpact of event scale (IESR- total score, PTSD symptoms)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResilience (BRS) (low)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Threat to Life (low)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50(79)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGPES score (-5: vastly worse, 5: vastly better)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.1(2.3), (-5)-5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEQ-5d-VAS (0: best health, 100: worst health)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e), 12\u0026ndash;100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEQ-5d (index value), ((-1) \u0026ndash; (+\u0026thinsp;1))\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.62(0.19), (-0.6,1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePain and disability (\u0026Ouml;MPSQ), (0: lowest pain, 100: highest pain)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.8(15.3), 13\u0026ndash;76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisability level (WHODAS), (0: highest functioning, 100: lowest functioning)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43.5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e), 20\u0026ndash;83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eRTW\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Return to work; HADS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; IEQ\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;The Injustice Experience Questionnaire; IESR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;The Impact of Event Scale-Revised; BRS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;The Brief Resilience Scale; GPES\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;the Global Perceived Effect; EQ-5D\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;The EuroQol 5 dimensions; VAS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Visual Analogue Scale; \u0026Ouml;MPSQ= \u0026Ouml;rebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire; WHODAS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Vocational outcomes\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants\u0026rsquo; vocational outcomes at baseline, six- and 12-months post baseline are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. Sixty-seven percent (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;42), 92% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;46), and 88% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;36) of participants reported returning to same job and same company or different job and/or different company at baseline, and six- and 12-months post-baseline, respectively. The mean of disability days recorded was 13 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10), 34 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;50), 48 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;93) days at baseline, and six, and 12 months of the baseline, respectively. On average, participants had worked 83 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;65), 135 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;64), and 127 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;65) hours 4 weeks prior to completing the baseline and six-, and 12-months post-baseline surveys, respectively. At baseline 43% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;27) of the participants had used at least one type of job modifications to RTW whereas at six- and 12-months post-baseline 30 (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15) and 24 (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10) percent utilised modifications, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross the three time points, the mean of participants\u0026rsquo; RTW self-efficacy score was approximately 6 from 2 to 10 (higher score demonstrated better self-efficacy). Of those who did RTW at baseline, and six- and 12 months from RTI, between 15% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7) to 33% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12) reported experiencing difficulty performing job duties at least half of time. The impact of injury on the work productivity of these participants decreased from 0.46 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.31) at baseline to 0.15 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.24) at 12-month assessment and their presenteeism at work increased from 67 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15) at baseline to 72 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9) at 12-months survey.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants\u0026rsquo; vocational outcomes at baseline (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;63), six (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;50), and 12 (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41) months of the baseline assessment. Values are presented as mean (SD).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBaseline\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6 months\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12 months\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRTW status, No. (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eReturned to same job and same company\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39(62)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39(78)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30(73)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eReturned to different job and/or different company\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDid not return to work\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDisability days, Mean (SD), range\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e),0\u0026ndash;28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e),0-210\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48(93), 0-394\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWork hours 4 weeks before the survey, Mean (SD), range\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83(65), 0-190\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e135(64), 0-256\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e127(65), 0-240\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRTW with job modification, No. (%)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFewer work hours\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMore breaks during the workday\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFlexible work schedule\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eReduce physical demand of the job\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePerform different duties/work tasks\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAsk others to assist with duties that cause pain\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eArrange for the use of a special chair, equipment, or tool\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRearrange the workspace\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRTWSES* total score\u003c/b\u003e (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR3 CR4 CR5 CR6 CR7 CR8 CR9\" citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.2(2.5), 1-9.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.2(2.8), 1-9.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6(2.6),1-9.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSupervisor domain\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e),1-9.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.6(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e),1\u0026ndash;9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.3(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), 1-9.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePain domain\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9(0.4), 1-2.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2(0.4), 1.2\u0026ndash;2.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9(0.4), 1.2\u0026ndash;2.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCo-worker domain\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.6(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), 1\u0026ndash;9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.2(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), 1\u0026ndash;8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.4(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), 1\u0026ndash;8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDifficulty performing job duties* (WRFQ-total score), No. (%)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eStart the job as soon as arrived at work\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDo the work without making mistakes\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRepeat the same motions repeatedly while working\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eConcentrate on the work\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePerform multiple tasks at the same time\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eImpact on work productivity* (WPAI- work scale), Mean (SD), range\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.46(0.31), 0\u0026ndash;1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.17(0.25), 0-0.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.15(0.24), 0-0.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWork performance\u003c/b\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cb\u003e*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cb\u003e(WHO-HPQ)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAbsolute absenteeism\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e), (-50)-160\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13(64), -128-280\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e), -77, 160\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAbsolute presenteeism\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e67(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e),20\u0026ndash;90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e69(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e), (-10)-90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e),50\u0026ndash;90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e*Completed by those who had returned to work at baseline (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;42), and 6 (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;46) and 12 (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;36) months post-baseline. RTW\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Return to work; RTWSES\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;The Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy Scale; WPAI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire; WRFQ\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Work Role Functioning Questionnaire; HPQ\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Health and Work Performance Questionnaire.\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. RTW trajectories\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e displays the pattern of the RTW trajectories in the study participants (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;55). Individuals with less than 3 timepoints of data were removed (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8) to create a clearer picture of the trajectories. Overall, the graph shows even though most individuals did RTW with or without using work modifications (88%), around 13% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8) had at least one RTW failure. Three general patterns were identified for participants who returned to work at baseline: (i) One-third of participants RTW at baseline without using any types of job modifications. Almost all of these participants continued working with some (~\u0026thinsp;30%) needing to use work modifications to stay at work one year after RTI. (ii) One-third of participants required modification to their job to RTW at baseline. Half of these participants stayed at work without using any modifications whereas the remaining participants had to use at least one type of work modification temporarily or permanently to stay at work after one year. (iii) One-third reported not returning to work at baseline. Of these, the majority returned and stayed at work after one month of RTI with or without using job modifications. The proportion of off-work participants gradually decreased until reaching to around 2 percent (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1) towards the end of the study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Predictors of two vocational outcomes (RTW status and disability days)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnivariate analysis was used to identify associations between 47 baseline variables with RTW status and number of disability days at baseline, and six- and 12 months post-baseline. Ten variables were found to be significantly associated with RTW status at baseline (p value\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.1) and were examined with binary logistic regression (see Supplementary Materials, Table A for detailed results). RTW at baseline was predicted by having lower severity of injury (i.e. soft tissue versus fracture/dislocation) and lower level of pain and disability (\u0026Ouml;MPSQ) (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.65, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). At 6 months, of two variables entered in the regression analysis, only being younger predicted RTW (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.2, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). At 12 months, being a casual/part-time employee was significantly associated with non-RTW whereas having higher annual income (over \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e51,999) was associated with RTW. Of these two variables, earning higher level of income predicted RTW at 12 months (R2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.25, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTwenty-two variables were found to be correlated with higher number of disability days (see Supplementary Materials, Table B for detailed results)). Of these, having more disability days at baseline was predicted by (i) being male, (ii) being admitted to hospital after the RTI, (iii) sustaining a more severe injury (fracture/dislocation vs soft tissue), (iii) lodging a claim for compensation, (iv) having greater disability (WHODAS); and (v) greater feelings of distress related to intrusion (IESR- intrusion domain) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e), (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.53, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). At 6 months of the 12 variables included in the regression analysis, being older and having lower level of RTW self-efficacy at baseline predicted higher number of disability days (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.18, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). At 12 months of the 8 variables entered in the regression analysis, four predicted higher number of disability days at 12 months. These were: (i) being older, (ii) having lower level of education (secondary vs tertiary), (iii) sustaining more severe injury (fracture/dislocation vs soft tissue), and (iiii) being in casual employment pre-injury (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.29, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMultivariable logistic and linear regression models predicting RTW, number of disability days and work hours at baseline, and 6 months and 12 months post-baseline. Reference group in parentheses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExp(B)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95%CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRTW status\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eBaseline\u003c/b\u003e (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;63)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eType of injury (fracture/dislocation)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u0026ndash;0.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026Ouml;MPSQ score\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.89\u0026ndash;0.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e6 months\u003c/b\u003e (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;50)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAge\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.78\u0026ndash;1.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e12 months\u003c/b\u003e (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnnual income pre-injury (over $51,999)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.1.18\u0026ndash;121.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDisability days\u003c/b\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cb\u003e2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eBaseline\u003c/b\u003e (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;63)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGender (male)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.44\u0026ndash;7.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHospital admission (yes)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.3\u0026ndash;9.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eType of injury (fracture)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.3\u0026ndash;9.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLodge a claim (yes)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.6\u0026ndash;8.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDisability level (WHODAS)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u0026ndash;0.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eImpact of injury (IESR_ Intrusion)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.57\u0026ndash;4.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e6 months\u003c/b\u003e (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;50)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAge\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2\u0026ndash;2.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRTW-Self efficacy (Pain)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-8.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-16.1- 0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e12 months\u003c/b\u003e (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAge\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.11\u0026ndash;4.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEducation (secondary)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-50.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-111.5-7.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eType of injury (fracture)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-8.9-109.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEmployment status (casual/part-time)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.2\u0026ndash;70.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026Ouml;MPSQ= \u0026Ouml;rebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire; WHODAS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule; IESR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;The Impact of Event Scale-Revised. \u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e Binary Logistic Regression analysis; \u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e Stepwise multivariate Linear Regression analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe aim of this study was to quantify a set of vocational outcomes after RTI; to explore RTW trajectories over 12 months; and to identify predictors of RTW status and disability days at baseline, six and 12 months post-RTI. Thirty-three percent of participants did not RTW at baseline (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;21) and around 10% at six- (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4) and 12-months (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5) post-baseline. The mean disability days was 48 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;93) one year after RTI. Participants had different RTW trajectories with most using at least one type of work modification to return/stay at work, and around 13% having at least one RTW failure one year from their RTI. RTW at baseline was predicted by lower severity of injury, lower level of pain and disability, and younger age; at 6 months by being a casual/part-time employee, and at 12 months by earning higher level of income pre-injury. Having more disability days was predicted at baseline by being male, being admitted to hospital, sustaining a more severe injury, lodging a claim for compensation, having greater disability; and greater feelings of distress related to intrusion; at 6 months by being older and having lower level of RTW self-efficacy; and at 12 months by being older, having lower level of education, sustaining more severe injury, and being in a casual employment pre-injury.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study provided a comprehensive understanding of the RTW process following mild to serious RTI through the application of multiple vocational outcome measures over a one-year period. Overall, 88% of participants in this study returned to work one year after the RTI. This rate aligns with previously reported RTW rates for mild to serious RTI, which range from 78% to 95% (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR39 CR40 CR41 CR42\" citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e). Although there was a gradual improvement in work performance and a reduction in impaired work productivity over time, findings indicated that 17% of those who returned to work were not employed in their pre-injury role or job one year after the injury (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, measuring the number of disability days revealed that some individuals continued to require time off work due to recurrence or exacerbation of their RTI, even after initially returning. These findings reinforce that first RTW alone is not an adequate indicator of vocational outcome (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e) and highlight the importance of using multiple, longitudinal measures to capture the complex and ongoing impact of RTI on work participation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eVisualising RTW patterns over the 12-month period revealed heterogeneous RTW trajectories, similar to those previously reported in individuals with musculoskeletal work-related injuries (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e). While most participants had returned to work by 12 months post-injury, approximately one in eight (13%) were not in sustained employment. To our knowledge, the only other study investigating RTW patterns after RTI was conducted by Gray et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). Their study used claimants\u0026rsquo; income replacement data derived from an insurance company database, finding that 17% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5401) of participants had at least one RTW failure two years post-injury. Differences between studies likely reflect variations in follow-up duration and outcome measurement approaches. In the present study, RTW status by timepoint (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) and individual RTW trajectories (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) showed that early RTW was predominantly with modifications during the first month following the crash, followed by a progressive shift toward RTW without modifications over subsequent months. This pattern indicates that early access to suitable work modifications supports both initial RTW and sustained participation in the workforce. These findings underscore the significance of work modification availability, particularly during the early post-injury phase, in facilitating a successful RTW. This is especially relevant in jurisdictions with fault-based compensation schemes, where employers are not legally obligated to offer modified duties to employees recovering from non\u0026ndash;work-related RTI. Future studies should examine what educational, financial, or legal supports could be provided to employers to encourage early, modified RTW opportunities for this group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study showed that the predictive strength of vocational outcome measures (i.e., RTW status and number of disability days) varied over time within the same population. RTW status demonstrated relatively stronger predictive strength compared with disability days. Although the number of predictors in the final models differed between the two outcome measures, the most common baseline predictors were related to physical health. Specifically, individuals with more severe injuries, greater levels of pain and disability, and older age were less likely to RTW and more likely to record a higher number of disability days. This finding aligns with a systematic review reporting strong evidence for an association between better health status and improved RTW outcomes after mild to serious RTI (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). However, contrary to that review, the present study found that older age was associated with poorer RTW outcomes, consistent with other studies showing that prolonged work disability (assessed by different measures) tends to be more pronounced in older workers (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e). These findings highlight the importance of providing timely and appropriate interventions particularly within the first month following RTI to optimise recovery and support early RTW (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e). Beyond the early phase, key predictors at six and twelve months were primarily work-related: participants in casual or part-time employment were less likely to RTW at six months and more likely to report more disability days at twelve months, whereas higher pre-injury income predicted RTW. These results are consistent with Prang et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e), although Murgatroyd et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e) reported no association between income/employment status and time to RTW following orthopaedic RTI; discrepancies may reflect sample composition and predictor categorisation, with Murgatroyd et al. including a larger proportion of severe\u0026ndash;critical injuries. These results point to a staged, systems-oriented approach to RTW after RTI. In the first month, timely rehabilitation and early coordination with employers to trial temporary work modifications may help facilitate initial RTW. From six to twelve months, attention could increasingly shift toward workplace solutions (e.g., job redesign, flexible scheduling) and targeted support for workers in insecure or part-time employment. Ongoing communication among workers, clinicians, and employers appears likely to support sustained participation. In fault-based schemes, mechanisms that enable or incentivise early employer engagement and low-cost modifications may be beneficial.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that provided a holistic picture of vocational outcomes after one year of mild to serious RTI. Different vocational outcome measures used in this study served as a basis to compare the appropriateness of each measure in indicating possible impacts of RTI on work within a single population. Visualisation of RTW trajectories highlighted the necessity of work modification in RTW process leading to introducing a current system-related gap associated with unavailability of employers\u0026rsquo; support for those with non-work-related RTI in a fault-based scheme. In addition, this study found that some people may experience one or multiple RTW failures following their first RTW. Future studies are needed to identify group based RTW trajectories using new statistical methods and predictors of these trajectories. The multidimensional nature of data (health, work, and system-related factors) collected in this study resulted in identifying some important predictors of vocational outcomes following RTI which can be considered in developing future RTW interventions. A limitation of this study was the small sample size and the relatively high attrition rate across follow-ups. The main reason for this attrition was difficulty in re-contacting participants after discharge, particularly those with minor injuries who often recovered quickly and perceived little ongoing benefit in continued participation. This challenge is well-documented in longitudinal studies recruiting from emergency departments, where attrition rates of up to 55% have been reported in studies of patients after severe injury (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e). Despite this limitation, the overall trends and associations observed in this study were consistent with findings from larger cohorts, supporting the robustness of the results.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":" \u003cp\u003eThere are no conflicts of interests to declare.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis project was conducted as part of the PhD project of Masoumeh Abedi (first author). She was supported by The University of Queensland Research Training Scholarship. The project received funding from the Motor Accident Insurance Commission (MAIC).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eClinical trial number\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003enot applicable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHuman Ethics and Consent to Participate declarations\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eplease see sections 2.3 and 2.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eMasoumeh Abedi: Methodology; Investigation; Data curation; Formal analysis; Project administration; Writing- Original draft preparation; Writing- Reviewing and Editing.Tammy Aplin: Supervision; Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation; Data curation; Formal analysis; Writing original draft; Writing- Reviewing and Editing.Elise Gane: Supervision; Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation; Data curation; Formal analysis; Writing original draft; Writing- Reviewing and Editing.Venerina Johnston: Supervision; Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLitchfield F. The cost of road crashes in Australia 2016: An overview of safety strategies. Canberra: The Australian National University; 2017.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoad traffic injuries WHO [updated 21 June. 2021. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVos T, Lim SS, Abbafati C, Abbas KM, Abbasi M, Abbasifard M, et al. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSteinhauser R, Lancsar E. Social Cost of Road Crashes: Report for the Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics. Australia: Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics; 2022. September 2022.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeolsson A, Hermansen A, Peterson G, Nilsing Strid E. Return to work a bumpy road: a qualitative study on experiences of work ability and work situation in individuals with chronic whiplash-associated disorders. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):785.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGray SE, Hassani-Mahmooei B, Kendall E, Cameron ID, Kenardy J, Collie A. Factors associated with graduated return to work following injury in a road traffic crash. J Transp Health. 2018;10:167\u0026ndash;77.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbedi M, Gane E, Aplin T, Zerguine H, Johnston V. Barriers and Facilitators Associated with Return to Work Following Minor to Serious Road Traffic Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Systematic Review. J Occup Rehabil. 2021.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCassidy JD, Carroll LJ, C\u0026ocirc;t\u0026eacute; P, Lemstra M, Berglund A, Nygren \u0026Aring;. Effect of Eliminating Compensation for Pain and Suffering on the Outcome of Insurance Claims for Whiplash Injury. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(16):1179\u0026ndash;86.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeth-Petersen S, Rotger GP. Long-term labour-market performance of whiplash claimants. J Health Econ. 2009;28(5):996\u0026ndash;1011.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGray SE, Hassani-Mahmooei B, Cameron ID, Kendall E, Kenardy J, Collie A. Patterns and Predictors of Failed and Sustained Return-to-Work in Transport Injury Insurance Claimants. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28(4):740\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLau G, Gabbe BJ, Collie A, Ponsford J, Ameratunga S, Cameron PA, et al. The Association Between Fault Attribution and Work Participation After Road Traffic Injury: A Registry-Based Observational Study. J Occup Rehabil. 2020;30(2):235\u0026ndash;54.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFitzharris M, Bowman D, Ludlow K. Factors associated with return-to-work and health outcomes among survivors of road crashes in Victoria. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2010;34(2):153\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGopinath B, Jagnoor J, Harris IA, Nicholas M, Casey P, Blyth F, et al. Prognostic indicators of social outcomes in persons who sustained an injury in a road traffic crash. Injury. 2015;46(5):909\u0026ndash;17.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGopinath B, Jagnoor J, Elbers N, Cameron IDJBRN. Overview of findings from a 2-year study of claimants who had sustained a mild or moderate injury in a road traffic crash: prospective study. 2017;10(1):76.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbedi M, Aplin T, Gane E, Johnston V. Exploring the perspectives of key stakeholders in returning to work after minor to serious road traffic injuries: a qualitative study. J Occup Rehabil. 2023;33(1):93\u0026ndash;106.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbedi M, Aplin T, Gane E, Johnston V. No Man\u0026rsquo;s Land: the experiences of persons injured in a road traffic crash wanting to return to work in Queensland, Australia. Disabil Rehabil. 2024;46(1):48\u0026ndash;57.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdams H, Ellis T, Stanish WD, Sullivan MJ. Psychosocial factors related to return to work following rehabilitation of whiplash injuries. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17(2):305\u0026ndash;15.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchultz IZ, Stowell AW, Feuerstein M, Gatchel RJ. Models of return to work for musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17(2):327\u0026ndash;52.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGane EM, Smits EJ, Brakenridge CL, Gangathimmaiah V, Jagnoor J, Cameron ID, et al. Functional and employment outcomes following road traffic crashes in Queensland, Australia: Protocol for a prospective cohort study. J Transp Health. 2019;15:100678.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eReilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. PharmacoEconomics. 1993;4:353\u0026ndash;65.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKessler RC, Ames M, Hymel PA, Loeppke R, McKenas D, Richling D, et al. Using the WHO Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ) to evaluate the indirect workplace costs of illness. J Occup Environ Med. 2004;46(Suppl 6):S23\u0026ndash;37.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKessler RC, Barber C, Beck AL, Berglund PA, Cleary PD, McKenas D, et al. The World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ). J Occup Environ Med. 2003;45(2):156\u0026ndash;74.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbma F, Bjorner JB, Amick BC 3rd, Bultmann U. Two valid and reliable work role functioning questionnaire short versions were developed: WRFQ 5 and WRFQ 10. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;105:101\u0026ndash;11.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbma FI, Bultmann U, Amick Iii BC, Arends I, Dorland HF, Flach PA, et al. The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire v2.0 Showed Consistent Factor Structure Across Six Working Samples. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28(3):465\u0026ndash;74.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrouwer S, Franche R-L, Hogg-Johnson S, Lee H, Krause N, Shaw W. Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy: Development and Validation of a Scale in Claimants with Musculoskeletal Disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):244\u0026ndash;58.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHerdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen MF, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation -. Official J Int Soc Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727\u0026ndash;36.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLinton SJ, MacDonald S, Nicholas M. Development of a short form of the \u0026Ouml;rebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire. Spine. 2011;36(22):1891\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaltychev M, Mattie R, McCormick Z, Laimi K. Confirmatory factor analysis of 12-Item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in patients with musculoskeletal pain conditions. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31(5):702\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKamper SJ, Ostelo RW, Knol DL, Maher CG, de Vet HC, Hancock MJ. Global Perceived Effect scales provided reliable assessments of health transition in people with musculoskeletal disorders, but ratings are strongly influenced by current status. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2010;63(7):760-6.e1.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67(6):361\u0026ndash;70.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston M, Pollard B, Hennessey P. Construct validation of the hospital anxiety and depression scale with clinical populations. J Psychosom Res. 2000;48(6):579\u0026ndash;84.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMykletun A, Stordal E, Dahl AA. Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale: factor structure, item analyses and internal consistency in a large population. Br J Psychiatry. 2001;179:540\u0026ndash;4.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWeiss DS. The Impact of Event Scale-Revised. In: Assessing Psychological Trauma and PTSD,. 2nd Edition, editor. New York, : The Guilford Press,; 2004.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSullivan M, Adams H, Horan S, Maher D, Boland D, Gross R. The Role of Perceived Injustice in the Experience of Chronic Pain and Disability: Scale Development and Validation. J Occup Rehabil. 2008;18(3):249\u0026ndash;61.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith B, Dalen J, Wiggins K, Tooley E, Christopher P, Bernard J. The brief resilience scale: Assessing the ability to bounce back. Int J Behav Med. 2008;15(3):194\u0026ndash;200.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolbrook LT, Hoyt BD, Stein BM, Sieber JW. Perceived Threat to Life Predicts Posttraumatic Stress Disorder after Major Trauma: Risk Factors and Functional Outcome. J Trauma: Injury Infect Crit Care. 2001;51(2):287\u0026ndash;93.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVoorhis C, Morgan B. Understanding Power and Rules of Thumb for Determining Sample Size. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology. 2007.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuffolo CF, Friedland JF, Dawson DR, Colantonio A, Lindsay PH. Mild traumatic brain injury from motor vehicle accidents: factors associated with return to work. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(4):392\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEbel BE, Mack C, Diehr P, Rivara FP. Lost working days, productivity, and restraint use among occupants of motor vehicles that crashed in the United States. Inj Prev. 2004;10(5):314\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFort E, Bouffard E, Charnay P, Bernard M, Boisson D, Laumon B, et al. Return to work following road accidents: factors associated with late work resumption. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(4):283\u0026ndash;91.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeck B, Ekegren CL, Cameron P, Edwards ER, Bucknill A, Judson R, et al. Predictors of recovery in cyclists hospitalised for orthopaedic trauma following an on-road crash. Accid Anal Prev. 2017;106:341\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeldman M, Moore A, Cheek L. The effect of pre-injury physical fitness on the initial severity and recovery from whiplash injury, at six-month follow-up. 2008;22(4):364\u0026ndash;76.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHeron-Delaney M, Warren J, Kenardy JA. Predictors of non-return to work 2 years post-injury in road traffic crash survivors: Results from the UQ SuPPORT study. Injury. 2017;48(6):1120\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eButler RJ, Johnson WG, Baldwin ML. Managing Work Disability: Why First Return to Work is Not a Measure of Success. ILR Rev. 1995;48(3):452\u0026ndash;69.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcLeod CB, Reiff E, Maas E. B\u0026uuml;ltmann UJSJoW, Environment, Health. Identifying return-to-work trajectories using sequence analysis in a cohort of workers with work-related musculoskeletal disorders. 2018(2):147\u0026ndash;55.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBuitenhuis J, de Jong PJ, Jaspers JP, Groothoff JW. Work disability after whiplash: a prospective cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(3):262\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBerecki-Gisolf J, Clay FJ, Collie A, McClure RJ. Predictors of Sustained Return to Work After Work-Related Injury or Disease: Insights from Workers\u0026rsquo; Compensation Claims Records. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(3):283\u0026ndash;91.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eClay FJ, Newstead SV, Watson WL, McClure RJ. Determinants of return to work following non life threatening acute orthopaedic trauma: a prospective cohort study. J Rehabil Med. 2010;42(2):162\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePrang KH, Berecki-Gisolf J, Newnam S. Recovery from musculoskeletal injury: the role of social support following a transport accident. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13:97.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMurgatroyd DF, Harris IA, Tran Y, Cameron ID, Murgatroyd D. Predictors of return to work following motor vehicle related orthopaedic trauma. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:171.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNishi D, Matsuoka Y, Nakajima S, Noguchi H, Kim Y, Kanba S, et al. Are patients after severe injury who drop out of a longitudinal study at high risk of mental disorder? Compr Psychiatr. 2008;49(4):393\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"journal-of-occupational-rehabilitation","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"joor","sideBox":"Learn more about [Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation](https://www.springer.com/journal/10926)","snPcode":"10926","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10926/3","title":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Return to work, disability, traffic accidents, longitudinal cohort study","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8246087/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8246087/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eIdentifying factors influencing work after road traffic injuries (RTI) is important for developing early and appropriate interventions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePurpose\u003c/strong\u003e: This study aimed to quantify vocational outcomes up to 12 months after RTIs; to explore Return to work (RTW) trajectories over this period; and to identify predictors of RTW status and disability days at baseline, 6, and 12 months post-RTI.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods\u003c/strong\u003e: Individuals aged 18 to 64 years with mild to serious RTI presenting to two Australian public hospital emergency departments were recruited. Exclusions were severe injury and not being in paid employment pre-injury. Assessment occurred at baseline, six months, and 12 months post-RTI.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e: Sixty-three participants completed the baseline survey. By 12 months, 88% had returned to work, mostly with work modifications, while 13% experienced at least one RTW failure. Mean disability days were 48 (SD= 93). Predictors of RTW at baseline were lower injury severity, less pain/disability, and younger age (R²=0.65, p\u0026lt;0.05); at 6 months, being a casual/part-time employee (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e= 0.2, p\u0026lt;0.05) and at 12 months, higher pre-injury income (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e= 0.25, p\u0026lt;0.05). Predictors of more disability days at baseline included being male, hospital admission, greater injury severity, greater disability, lodging a compensation claim, and higher distress from intrusion (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e= 0.53, p\u0026lt;0.05); at 6 months, older age and lower RTW self-efficacy (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e= 0.18, p\u0026lt;0.05); and at 12 months, older age, lower level of education, greater injury severity, and casual/part-time pre-injury employment (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e= 0.29, p\u0026lt;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusions\u003c/strong\u003e: RTW after RTI is a dynamic, staged process. Early outcomes are primarily health-related, whereas 6–12-month outcomes are shaped by psychosocial factors. Sustained RTW often requires work modifications, underscoring the need for coordinated, systems-based rehabilitation strategies.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Trajectory and predictors of return-to-work outcomes for people after a road traffic injury: A prospective cohort study","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-12-22 09:20:01","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8246087/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-02-16T13:22:04+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-02-15T15:42:02+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-01-26T05:17:57+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"281573842847489594706086443445940204500","date":"2025-12-17T15:46:41+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"187485464853621954239524798723734670502","date":"2025-12-12T19:44:45+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-12-12T15:37:33+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-12-12T02:50:55+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-12-12T02:50:08+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","date":"2025-12-01T04:36:17+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"journal-of-occupational-rehabilitation","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"joor","sideBox":"Learn more about [Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation](https://www.springer.com/journal/10926)","snPcode":"10926","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10926/3","title":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"6943b67d-e698-46c7-93cf-bc118fa146ee","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 22nd, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-04T15:59:32+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-8246087","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-026-10380-0","journal":{"identity":"journal-of-occupational-rehabilitation","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation"},"publishedOn":"2026-04-30 15:57:26","publishedOnDateReadable":"April 30th, 2026"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-12-22 09:20:01","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s10926-026-10380-0","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-026-10380-0","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8246087","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8246087","identity":"rs-8246087","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}