Premium
Language preference and non‐traumatic low back disorders in washington state workers' compensation
Author(s) -
Bonauto David K.,
Smith Caroline K.,
Adams Darrin A.,
Fan Z. Joyce,
Silverstein Barbara A.,
Foley Michael P.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
american journal of industrial medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.7
H-Index - 104
eISSN - 1097-0274
pISSN - 0271-3586
DOI - 10.1002/ajim.20740
Subject(s) - medicine , workers' compensation , plaintiff , occupational injury , payment , population , occupational safety and health , compensation (psychology) , indemnity , work (physics) , demographic economics , actuarial science , injury prevention , poison control , environmental health , business , psychology , finance , social psychology , mechanical engineering , pathology , political science , economics , law , engineering
Background Workers in the United States with limited English proficiency likely perform more hazardous work, experience higher rates of work‐related injury and illness, and have worse disability outcomes. Methods We conducted a descriptive study of employment characteristics, timeliness and utilization of workers' compensation (WC) insurance benefits, cost and occupational health outcomes for Washington State WC state fund, non‐traumatic low back disorders (LBD) claimants by language preference. Results A greater proportion of Spanish language preferring (SLP) LBD claims filed were accepted and resulted in lost work time than English language preferring (ELP) LBD claims. There were significant differences in the demographic, employment, and occupational characteristics between the SLP and ELP compensable claimant populations. The SLP LBD compensable claimants had greater time loss duration, greater medical and total claim costs, more use of physical therapy and vocational services than the ELP LBD compensable claimants. With the exception of the timeliness for providing the first time loss payment, the time periods for provision of insurance benefits did not differ between the SLP and ELP populations. SLP compensable claimants received less back surgery and had comparable permanent partial disability payments to the ELP population. Employers were more likely to protest the acceptance of a SLP compensable than one in an ELP LBD compensable claim. Conclusion For those injured workers accessing the Washington State WC system, we observed differences based on language preference for pre‐injury, and workers compensation outcomes. Further research is needed to explain the observed differences. Am. J. Ind. Med. 53:204–215 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.