Objective To identify prognostic factors for the 2-year course of work participation in early osteoarthritis (OA) of hips or knees. Methods In this prospective cohort study, questionnaire data from 925 subjects was analyzed. Rate ratios were calculated to compare work participation with the general Dutch population, corrected for age, sex and education. The overall participation rate at T2 was compared to baseline. Personal factors, self-reported health status (Western Ontario McMasters Arthritis Index—WOMAC), medical consumption and physical work demands were compared between subjects with sustained work participation and subject who stopped working; factors that differed significantly were included in a logistic regression analysis. Results Work participation in the cohort (mean age 58, 79 % females) decreased from 51 to 46 %, a similar rate to the general population. Subjects who continued working were younger than those who stopped working (mean 4.2 years) and they had less frequently reported sick-leave at baseline; the regression model included both factors. 11 % Of the workers reported sick-leave in the past year because of hip/knee complaints (similar to baseline). 20 % Reported work adaptations, compared to 14 % at baseline. Conclusion The 2-year course of work participation of people with early OA was similar to the general Dutch population. Sustained work participation was predicted by lower age, not by OA related factors.
Osteoarthritis Knee Hip Work participation Cohort
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
CHECK is funded by the Dutch Arthritis Association on the lead of a steering committee comprising 16 members with expertise in different fields of OA chaired by Prof. J.W.J.Bijlsma and coordinated by J.Wesseling, MSc. Involved are: Academic Hospital Maastricht; Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam; Jan van Breemen Institute/VU Medical Center Amsterdam; Kennemer Gasthuis Haarlem; Martini Hospital Groningen/Allied Health Care Center for Rheumatology and Rehabilitation Groningen; Medical Spectrum Twente Enschede/Twenteborg Hospital Almelo; St. Maartenskliniek Nijmegen; Leiden University Medical Center; University Medical Center Utrecht and Wilhelmina Hospital Assen. This work was supported by NutsOhra Fonds (SNO-T-08-80) and Mobiliteitsfonds HBO (PR0512-C).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts on interest.
Theis KA, Murphy L, Hootman JM, et al. Prevalence and correlates of arthritis–attributable work limitation in the US population among persons ages 18–64: 2002 national health interview survey data. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(3):355–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacaille D, Hogg RS. The effect of arthritis on working life expectancy. J Rheumatol. 2001;28(10):2315–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Gobelet C, Luthi F, Al-Khodairy AT, et al. Work in inflammatory and degenerative joint diseases. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29(17):1331–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muchmore L, Lynch WD, Gardner HH, et al. Prevalence of arthritis and associated joint disorders in an employed population and the associated healthcare, sick leave, disability, and workers’ compensation benefits cost and productivity loss of employers. J Occup Environ Med. 2003;45(4):369–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goetzel RZ, Long SR, Ozminkowski RJ, et al. Health, absence, disability, and presenteeism cost estimates of certain physical and mental health conditions affecting U.S. employers. J Occup Environ Med. 2004;46(4):398–412.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leigh JP, Seavey W, Leistikow B. Estimating the costs of job related arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2001;28(7):1647–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Gignac MA, Cao X, Lacaille D, et al. Arthritis-related work transitions: a prospective analysis of reported productivity losses, work changes, and leaving the labor force. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(12):1805–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gignac MA, Backman CL, Davis AM, et al. Understanding social role participation: what matters to people with arthritis? J Rheumatol. 2008;35(8):1655–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Wilkie R, Peat G. Social participation and osteoarthritis: the foundations have been laid where next? J Rheumatol. 2008;35(8):1484–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Wesseling J, Dekker J, van den Berg WB, et al. CHECK (Cohort hip and Cohort knee): similarities and differences with the Osteoarthritis initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(9):1413–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bieleman HJ, Oosterveld FGJ, Oostveen JCM, et al. Work participation and health status in early osteoarthritis of hip and/or knee: a comparison between the Cohort hip and Cohort knee and the Osteoarthritis initiative. Arthritis Care Res. 2010;62(5):683–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verstappen SMM, Boonen A, Verkleij H, et al. Productivity costs among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the influence of methods and sources to value loss of productivity. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64(12):1754–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care. 1993;31(3):247–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, et al. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15(12):1833–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Roorda LD, Jones CA, Waltz M, et al. Satisfactory cross cultural equivalence of the Dutch WOMAC in patients with hip osteoarthritis waiting for arthroplasty. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(1):36–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and therapeutic criteria committee of the American rheumatism association. Arthritis Rheum. 1986;29(8):1039–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman R, Alarcon G, Appelrouth D, et al. The American college of rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hip. Arthritis Rheum. 1991;34(5):505–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuijer PP, de Beer MJ, Houdijk JH, et al. Beneficial and limiting factors affecting return to work after total knee and hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2009;19(4):375–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grotle M, Hagen KB, Natvig B, et al. Prevalence and burden of osteoarthritis: results from a population survey in Norway. J Rheumatol. 2008;35(4):677–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Pincus T, Mitchell JM, Burkhauser RV. Substantial work disability and earnings losses in individuals less than age 65 with osteoarthritis: comparisons with rheumatoid arthritis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42(5):449–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacaille D, White MA, Rogers PA, et al. A proof-of-concept study of the “Employment and arthritis: making it work” program. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(11):1647–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theis KA, Helmick CG, Hootman JM. Arthritis burden and impact are greater among U.S. women than men: intervention opportunities. J Womens Health. 2007;16(4):441–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar