<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">606210784</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20210128101035.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">210128e20150301xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1007/s10926-014-9522-9</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s10926-014-9522-9</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Returning to Work Following Low Back Pain: Towards a Model of Individual Psychosocial Factors</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[Elyssa Besen, Amanda Young, William Shaw]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Purpose The aim of this paper is to develop and test a model of direct and indirect relationships among individual psychosocial predictors of return-to-work (RTW) outcomes following the onset of low back pain (LBP). Methods We utilize secondary analysis of a larger study of adults seeking treatment for work-related LBP with recent onset. In total, 241 participants who completed a baseline survey, a short follow-up survey, and a longer follow-up survey after 3months were included in our analyses. The participants were required to have LBP with onset of less than 14days, be 18years or older, and be fluent in English or Spanish. The analyses utilized structural equation models to test the direct and indirect relationships among the variables and RTW outcomes at 3months. Results Our results indicated a good fit for our model (χ2=69.59, df=45, p&lt;.05; RMSEA=.05; CFI=.95; WRMR=.61). Pain, catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, organizational support, and RTW confidence were all found to have indirect relationships with the outcomes. RTW confidence and RTW expectations were found to have direct relationships with the outcomes. Conclusions The process of returning to work after an episode of LBP is a complex process involving many interrelated factors. Understanding the relationships among critical individual factors in the RTW process may be important for the treatment and rehabilitation of those with LBP. Results suggest that if injured workers are struggling with fear avoidance, pain catastrophizing and confidence issues, they might benefit from the application of cognitive behavioral therapy techniques.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">The Author(s), 2014</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Return-to-work</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Recovery expectations</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Work disability prevention</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Individual psychosocial factors</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Fear-avoidance beliefs</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Besen</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Elyssa</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Hopkinton, MA, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Young</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Amanda</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Hopkinton, MA, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Shaw</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">William</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Hopkinton, MA, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer US; http://www.springer-ny.com</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">25/1(2015-03-01), 25-37</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">1053-0487</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">25:1&lt;25</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2015</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">25</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10926</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9522-9</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9522-9</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Besen</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Elyssa</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Hopkinton, MA, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Young</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Amanda</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Hopkinton, MA, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Shaw</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">William</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Hopkinton, MA, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer US; http://www.springer-ny.com</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">25/1(2015-03-01), 25-37</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">1053-0487</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">25:1&lt;25</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2015</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">25</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10926</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
