REVIEW

Criteria and methods used for the assessment of fitness for work: a systematic review

Consol Serra¹, Mari Cruz Rodriguez¹, George L Delclos², Manel Plana³, Luis I Gómez López⁴ and Fernando G Benavides¹

¹ Occupational Health Research Unit, Department of Health and Experimental Sciences, University Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
² Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, The University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas, USA
³ Division of Health Services, MC MUTUAL, Barcelona, Spain
⁴ University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr C Serra
Occupational Health Research Unit, Department of Health and Experimental Sciences, University Pompeu Fabra, Dr Aiguader, 88, 08003 Barcelona, Spain; consol.serra{at}upf.edu

The main findings from reports published in scientific journals on the criteria and methods used to assess fitness for work were reviewed. Systematic searches were made using internet engine searches (1966–2005) with related keywords. 39 reports were identified, mostly from the US and western Europe. Assessment of fitness for work is defined by most as the evaluation of a worker’s capacity to work without risk to their own or others’ health and safety. It is mainly assessed at recruitment (pre-offer or post-offer), and when changes of work or health conditions occur. Five main criteria used by occupational doctors to evaluate fitness for work were identified: the determination of worker’s capacity and worker’s risk in relation to his or her workplace, as well as ethical, economic and legal criteria. Most authors agreed that assessment tools used need to be specific and cost-effective, and probably none gives unequivocal answers. Outcomes from fitness for work assessments range from "fit" to "unfit", with other possible intermediate categories such as "fit subject to work modifications", "fit with restrictions" or "conditionally fit (temporarily, permanently)". Workplace modifications to improve or adjust working conditions must always be considered. There is confusion about the decision-making process to be used to judge about fitness for work. There is very scarce scientific evidence based on empirical data, probably because there are no standard or valid methodologies for all professions and circumstances.

Abbreviations: ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Harrison, J. (2008). Doctors' health and fitness to practise: assessment models. Occup Med (Lond) 58: 318-322 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Harrison, J. (2008). Doctors' health and fitness to practise: the need for a bespoke model of assessment. Occup Med (Lond) 58: 323-327 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Moshe, S., Shilo, M., Yagev, Y., Levy, D., Slodownik, D., Chodick, G., Levin, M. (2008). Comparison of three methods of pre-employment medical evaluations. Occup Med (Lond) 58: 46-51 [Abstract] [Full Text]