Special issue: Vocational rehabilitation (II)

OPEN IN VIEWER

This second special issue showcases the remaining peer-reviewed submissions received in response to the very successful call for papers on vocational rehabilitation. Although diverse in approaches, methods and domains of vocational rehabilitation research, the articles in this issue share an ardent search for new knowledge and more effective practices. This collection, even though coincidental, enables readers to view and compare research approaches within different disability groups, across different methods and domains of practice.

The nine articles are arranged in two groups. The first group consists of four contributions relating to mental illness and other psychiatric conditions. In the first of these, Chang et al. (2016) report an implementation of evidence-based practices in circumstances where full integration between mental health services and vocational services was not possible. Two small yet interesting qualitative studies follow. Coombes et al. (2016) and Jarman et al. (2016) both report on how service users experience employment and employment services, and the results complement each other. They provide new clues as to how job tenure may be better understood and increased. In the last of this group, which is about older adults with psychiatric disabilities, Bonsaksen et al. (2016) interviewed members of a Norwegian Clubhouse. The results show a substantial proportion had unrealised employment interests and may benefit from additional individualised employment support outside the Clubhouse.

The second group of articles is about interventions for conditions other than mental illness or psychiatric disabilities. These cover intellectual disabilities (Terrana et al., 2016), musculoskeletal injury (Sheppard and Frost, 2016), dementia and cognitive impairment (Robertson et al., 2016), traumatic brain injury (Holmes et al., 2016), and a mixed disability group (Goods and Millsteed, 2016). Terrana et al. (2016) explore the limited rehabilitation options for people with intellectual disabilities in Trinidad and Tobago. This country has some forms of sheltered employment, but does not yet have programmes established to support open competitive employment in the wider community. Sheppard and Frost (2016) examine concepts in return-to-work programmes for people with long-term sickness absence following musculoskeletal injury. Their recommended approach is based on three principles considered likely to facilitate an early and more successful return to employment. Holmes et al. (2016) examine an often-overlooked area of practice, namely the effectiveness of a particular training package. This is important because developing new practices is only worthwhile if we also develop forms of training that can reliably replicate those practices. In the area of dementia and mild cognitive impairment, Robertson et al. (2016) examine the support needs of workers. They found that barriers to retaining employment in this group could be addressed earlier in their working life as targets of reasonable adjustments. Goods and Millsteed (2016) highlight another important issue, the need for a smooth transition to retirement following an active working life. This appears to be a universal issue applicable to all disability categories, namely that employment support may need a final phase centred on providing smooth transitions from well-established employment into an equally active retirement.

The large number of submissions received in response to the call indicates that vocational rehabilitation is an active area of research with many new opportunities for occupational therapists. This special issue also indicates the journal’s commitment to continue supporting occupational therapists and other allied health professionals through publishing strong, current investigations on topics relevant to their practice.