Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 51-3 | Page 30

L. Aasdahl et al. and depression disorders (3). There is also considerable overlap in symptoms between different diagnoses, such as back pain, anxiety and depression (10, 11). Øyeflaten et al. (6) found that FABQ was a prognostic factor for RTW in a group of participants with mixed diagnoses. However, we are not aware of studies that used the FABQ specifically for psychological disorders. In Norway, there is a long tradition of offering inpatient occupational rehabilitation to patients with different diagnoses, mainly musculoskeletal com- plaints, anxiety, depression and unspecific diagnoses. We recently evaluated the effects of 2 inpatient oc- cupational rehabilitation programmes. Both were compared with an outpatient programme consisting of group-based cognitive behavioural therapy (12, 13). One of the inpatient programmes (3.5 weeks) enhanced RTW compared with the outpatient programme [14] (personal communication), while the other (4+4 days) had no effect on RTW (13). The present study evaluated whether inpatient occu- pational rehabilitation reduced fear-avoidance beliefs more than outpatient cognitive behavioural therapy. As the inpatient programmes were more comprehensive and included several work elements intended to reduce fear-avoidance beliefs about work (e.g. work-related problem solving) and physical activity (e.g. supervised exercise sessions), it was hypothesized that the inpa- tient programmes would reduce fear-avoidance beliefs more than the outpatient programme. Furthermore, we assessed whether baseline scores and changes (pre- to post-intervention) in FABQ were associated with future work-participation. METHODS Study design and participants This study is based on data from 2 randomized clinical trials. Both trials were designed with parallel groups (Fig. 1) (12). The first trial compared a short inpatient multicomponent occupatio- nal rehabilitation programme (4+4 days) to a less comprehensive outpatient programme (6 sessions during 6 weeks) (hereafter referred to as the short inpatient and outpatient programmes, respectively) for individuals on sick-leave due to musculoskele- tal, unspecific, or common mental health disorders. The second trial compared a long inpatient programme (3.5 weeks) with the 176 Fig. 1. Flow of participants in the study. a Not eligible: serious somatic/psychiatric illness (n  = 20), a specific disorder requiring specialized treatment (n  = 10), currently participating in another treatment programme (n  = 15), insufficient Norwegian comprehension (n  = 1), scheduled surgery next 6 months (n  = 1). b Other reason: not met (n  = 10), medical assessment not completed (n  = 8), not motivated (n  = 5), no longer on sick-leave (n  = 2). c Not eligible: participating in another treatment programme (n  = 22), serious somatic/psychiatric illness (n  = 11), specialized treatment needs (n  = 4), problems with functioning in groups (n  = 3), surgery scheduled next 6 months (n  = 2), insufficient language skills (n  = 2), alcohol/drug abuse (n  = 1). d Other reason: medical assessment not completed (n  = 15), no longer on sick-leave (n  = 10), not motivated (n  = 6), inability to participate in an inpatient intervention (n  = 7), unknown (n  = 4). www.medicaljournals.se/jrm