More tips to ensure your RTW program is worth more than the paper on which it's written

Last week we wrote a post about ways to measure the effectiveness of your return to work (RTW) program.  As you may recall, the prior week's post gave some tips to measure the effectiveness of a newly implemented RTW program.

Let's discuss the more mature RTW program.
For employers who have had more experience with modified duty and lost time claims, the methods to evaluate the effectiveness mentioned in the prior post will also apply.  If you're looking for more targeted or "next level" metrics, there are some simple ways to accomplish this.

• The window of opportunity to positively impact the outcome of a workers' compensation claim is very short and it begins closing the day the injured worker is taken out of work. Employers must create a sense of urgency with regards to RTW.  Most of our insured employers feel that they are "pretty good" "in most cases" at identifying modified duty.  Assuming this is how you perceive your company, and this judgment is factually substantiated, you may want to start measuring the days until a RTW opportunity is found/offered.  Measure the days that pass between the time the claim representative or injured worker provided a RTW note and the date they received an offer to RTW.  Employers can be even more aggressive in their standards and measure from the actual date the injured worker was released to modified duty until the day they returned.  This would assume that the expectation is for any release to modified duty to be reported to the employer as soon as possible, likely by the injured worker.  These "lag time" days are wasted days of productive, meaningful work -- and days where temporary total disability are unnecessarily being paid.  Setting a goal and starting the clock will create that sense of urgency that is essential in an effective RTW program, and give you something to measure against.
• If you're an employer who really wants to challenge themselves, take a look at the Occupational Disability Guidelines (ODG) return to work recommendations. These are evidence-based guidelines for expected RTW targets based on diagnosis and categories of work (light, heavy, very heavy, etc.).  Holding your RTW outcomes to these standards gives you a benchmark to measure against.  Obviously there are going to be scenarios that don't comport to a set of guidelines, but it gives you an opportunity to look at a benchmark and investigate what the deviation stemmed from -- was it due to complications with treatment, or lack of a modified duty offer?  Another benefit of using guidelines is that it gives realistic projections for various timeframes of when an injured worker reaches different levels of work.  The guidelines also consider certain comorbidities (things that will impact recovery times).  Here's an example:
• ODG Treatment and Return to Wellness guidelines: 724.2  Lumbago
• Severe, manual work:  14-17 days
• Severe, heavy manual work:  35 days
• Obesity comorbidity (BMI >= 30), multiply by 1.31
• Because this particular injured worker was considered obese, ODG projects their recovery time to take about 31% longer than an injured worker who has a BMI of 29 or lower.

While it is sometime difficult to measure results, it's best to measure something -- and be sure to do it consistently.  Put some thought into what your goals are and how you're going to measure them.  Communicate these goals (repeatedly -- we mean it, every chance you get!) and share your progress.  The gold standard would be to find a way to make managers/supervisors accountable for their results.  As "they" say, you manage what you measure.