The WORKWELL programme: a randomised controlled trial of job retention vocational rehabilitation for people with inflammatory arthritis
Clicks: 2
ID: 321376
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
2 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #31 of 197 articles by views in Lara D. Veeken
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 197 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Objective People with inflammatory arthritis (IA) frequently experience work instability, absenteeism, and reduced productivity, culminating in early job loss. This study evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of WORKWELL job retention vocational rehabilitation (JRVR) delivered by occupational therapists, compared to a control group receiving written self-help advice. Methods A pragmatic, multi-centre randomised controlled trial was conducted across 18 UK NHS Trusts. Employed adults (n = 249) with IA experiencing moderate to severe work instability, were randomised (1:1) to intervention or control groups. WORKWELL included structured work assessment, individually tailored action plans, and interventions over 2-4 months. Follow-up was at 6, 12, and 36 months. The primary outcome was the Work Limitations Questionnaire-25 (WLQ-25). Analyses used linear mixed-effects regression adjusted for baseline characteristics and occupational skill level. An NHS perspective was used for the within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis. Much of the trial was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Results At 12 months, there was no significant difference in WLQ-25 between groups (adjusted mean difference: -1.8; 95% CI -7.4 to 3.8; p = 0.53), or in most secondary outcomes at 12- or 36-months. However, absenteeism showed a relative reduction of 46% at 12 months (p = 0.08), and employment retention at 36 months was higher in the intervention (93%) vs. control group (85%). The intervention was not cost-effective from an NHS perspective. Conclusion WORKWELL did not lead to improved work productivity compared to self-help advice. Future research should explore more flexible delivery methods, including digital tools, to support sustainable employment for people with IA. A plain-language abstract is available in the supplementary material. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03942783. ISRCTN Registry; ISRCTN61762297.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7169618750
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Alison Hammond, Jennifer Parker, Sarah Cotterill, Chris Sutton, Selman Mirza, Angela Ching, Terence W O’Neill, Fiona Holland, Antonia; id_orcid 0000-0003-3955-2649 Marsden, Paula Holland, Kate Radford, Suzanne Verstappen, Martin Eden, Garima Dalal, Simone Battista, June Culley, Karen Walker‐Bone, Sarah Woodbridge, Rachel O-Brien, Yvonne Hough, Yeliz Prior |
| Journal | Lara D. Veeken |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/rheumatology/keag373
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.