Table 2.
Employment outcomes list, results, and references of the included review studies.
| Reference | Employment Outcomes | Results | Quality Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Germundsson, P.; et al. (2012) [32] | Obtaining a job: (1) level of employment; (2) disposable income; (3) sum of allowances. | The authors reported that supported employment participants were hired faster, earned a higher disposable income, and lower individual allowances. Significance was not reported. | + |
| Hogelund, J.; et al. (2012) [66] | Time to full RTW: (1) time until first return to regular working hours. | This study suggested that PTSL did not reduce duration until full RTW for employees with mental disorders. Without controlling unobserved characteristics, they found a strong and significant effect of PTSL for these employees with mental disorders. However, this effect disappeared after the correction for unobserved characteristics. | + |
| van Veggel, R.; et al. (2015) [50] | Competitive employment: (1) getting a job in competitive employment; (2) individuals accumulating 13 weeks or more employment; (3) individuals accumulating 26 weeks or more employment; (4) days to first job; (5) mean hours worked per week in employment. | The authors found that more IPS participants initiated competitive employment than pre-IPS participants (24.9% vs. 14.3%). Significance not reported. | + |
| Andren, D. (2014) [51] | Time to return to work: (1) fully recovering lost work capacity and (2) duration of sick leave. | This study suggests positive and significant effects of PTSL after 60 days of FTSL for persons with mental disorders. | + |
| Kroger, C.; et al. (2014) [52] | Sickness absence: (1) days of incapacity to work. | This study underlined that more W-CBT participants were working at the follow-up and the treatment effect size for W-CBT was significantly higher than the control group effect. | + |
| Lagerveld, S. E.; et al. (2012) [53] | RTW: (1) full RTW; (2) duration of full RTW; (3) duration of partial RTW; Process of RTW: (4) number of steps until full RTW; (5) RTW relapses. |
The authors of the study found significant effects on duration until full RTW in the W-CBT group: full RTW occurred 65 days earlier and partial RTW occurred 12 days earlier. W-CBT experienced relapse more often, but the difference was not significant. | ++ |
| Martin, M. H.; et al. (2013) [54] | RTW: (1) time to RTW and (2) labor market status (self-supported, receiving sickness benefits, unemployment, disability, other). | This study found that the intervention significantly delayed time to RTW (HR = 0.50; 95% CI 0.34–0.75) in comparison with conventional case management. | + |
| Arends, I.; et al. (2014) [55] | Sickness absence: (1) recurrent sickness absence episodes; (2) time until recurrent sick absence. | This study underlined that the SHARP intervention was significantly effective in increasing the time until relapse and reducing sickness absence episodes, compared to care as usual. | + |
| Bejerholm, U.; et al. (2015) [56] | Competitive employment: (1) getting a job; (2) number of hours worked; (3) weeks worked; (4) job tenure; (5) income; and (6) time to first employment. | The authors found that IPS was significantly more effective than TVR in job access at 18-month follow-up (46% vs. 11%; difference 36%, 95% CI 18–54), as well as the number of working hours and weeks, longer job tenure periods, and income. | ++ |
| Hees, H. L.; et al. (2013) [57] | RTW: (1) time until partial RTW; (2) full RTW (3) absenteeism; (4) RTW with good health. | This study found that TAU+OT significantly accelerated work achievement and increased the probability of RTW in good health (GH). However, the addition of OT to TAU did not hasten recovery from depression. | ++ |
| Heslin, M.; et al. (2011) [58] | Job access: (1) competitive employment at 12 months; (2) competitive employment at 24 months | The authors of this IPS study reported that the intervention program was significantly more effective in obtaining a competitive job at 24 months follow-up than TAU (22% vs. 11%, p = 0.041). Previous work in the last 5 years also predicted job achievement and time to work attainment. | ++ |
| Hoffmann, H.; et al. (2012) [59] | Job access: (1) competitive employment rate; (2) length of employment at least 50% in competitive work (CW); (3) total weeks in CW; (4) annual weeks CW; (5) job tenure in longest CW held; (6) mean hours worked per year in CW; (7) cumulative duration of CW; (8) yearly income from CW; and (9) hourly competitive job wage in last 3 years. | This study showed that SE program was significantly more effective than TVR programs in assisting persons with severe mental illness to obtain and maintain competitive employment (65% compared with 33%). | ++ |
| Hoffmann, H.; et al. (2014) (Follow up study of Hoffmann et al., 2012) [65] | Job access: (1) competitive employment rate; (2) length of employment at least 50% in competitive work (CW); (3) total weeks in CW; (4) annual weeks CW; (5) job tenure in longest CW held; (6) mean hours worked per year in CW; (7) cumulative duration of CW; (8) yearly income from CW; and (9) hourly competitive job wage in last 3 years. | The authors found that SE intervention (IPS), at 5-year follow-up, was significantly more effective than TVR for competitive employment rate, length of employment, total weeks in CW, annual weeks CW, job tenure in longest CW, mean hours worked. | ++ |
| Michon, H.; et al. (2014) [60] | Rates of competitive employment: (1) gaining a competitive job; (2) days in competitive employment; (3) hours in competitive employment; (4) days to first job. | This study found that significantly more participants obtained competitive jobs before 18 and 30 months in the IPS group than the participants in the TVR group. | ++ |
| Noordik, E.; et al. (2013) [61] | RTW: (1) time to full RTW; (2) time to partial RTW; and (3) number of sick leave relapses. | The authors of this study reported that workers receiving the RTW-E intervention (209 days; 95% CI 62–256) had a significantly extended time to full RTW compared to workers receiving CAU (153 days; 95% CI 128–178). | + |
| Reme, S. E.; et al. (2015) [62] | Maintain or increase active work-life: (1) maintained work participation or new employment; (2) full or partial RTW. | This study showed that the intervention group had increased or maintained their work participation at follow-up compared to the control group (44.2% vs. 37.2%, p = 0.015). The effectiveness at 18 months remained significant. However, RTW results were inconsistent. | ++ |
| Vlasveld, M. C.; et al. (2013) [63] | RTW: (1) Duration until lasting, full RTW; (2) total number of sickness absence days | The results of this study suggested that the intervention was not significantly effective for the work-related outcomes. Collaborative care participants had a shorter time to response, with a difference of 2.8 months. | + |
| Volker, D.; et al. (2015) [64] | RTW: (1) time to first RTW; (2) time to full RTW; (3) number of days of sickness absence in the first-year follow-up. | The authors of the study determined inconclusive results. There was a significant RTW duration reduction until first RTW only. Time to full RTW and number of sickness absence days had no significant effects. | + |
RTW: return to work, PTSL: part-time sick leave, IPS: individual placement and support, FTSL: full-time sick leave, W-CBT: work-focused cognitive-behavioral treatment, SHARP: stimulating healthy participation and relapse prevention, TVR: traditional vocational rehabilitation, TAU: treatment as usual, OT: occupational therapy, SE: supported employment, CAU: care as usual; RTW-E: exposure-based RTW.