Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 51-2 | Page 49

124 S. Samoborec et al. the compensation provider, in particular, its primary point of contact, the case managers. Clients reported perceived lack of capacity by the case managers to advise on what type of services and when those can be accessed. While some clients (7) reported being confident in navigating the health and compensation process, others (16) stated a preference of having more structured information and guidance at the beginning and throughout the recovery journey. I keep asking them I want a job [at the compensation insurer] because nobody seems to know anything there and I don’t know anything so I’ll be very good at it and I’ll be quite nice on the phone and will be nice to people and say I don’t know anything and don’t even ring next week cause the people above me don’t know anything either. (Female, 55 years old, soft tissue-contusion) e) Lack of single point of contact and lack of trust in case managers’ decisions. Case managers were iden- tified by clients as playing an important and enduring role in the coordination of services they receive during their rehabilitation process. It was perceived that case managers were challenged by time and resource restric- tions in the management of a large number of clients in need. Clients were aware of the challenges faced by case managers. However, they complained about poor handover of information, constantly repeating their story when trying to get in touch, dealing with administrative people who do not understand medical terminology and the recovery process and a lack of response from the compensation provider when they were contacted. This consequently led to lack of trust in the system in general and even giving up on their claim as some clients expressed they could not have been “bothered” with the provider. If there was anything that was required I had to have a huge fight. You cannot get this and cannot get that. What can I get!? I was dealing with administrative people who perhaps have no understanding of the real level of capacity after injury and recovery. (Female, 50 years old, soft tissue – neck and back) f) Lack of understanding the system, its policies and procedures and lack of guidelines. Approximately 60% of clients reported there was no introduction to the com- pensation processes, no structure about what to expect and what services they can use and who to report back when recovery is not progressing as expected. Clients found the guidance in navigating the compensation system to be disappointing and a source of ongoing frustration. No … no one explained … no one introduced me to the system or how it works … There was very minimal information provided unless we asked the direct question. The amount of time to get to the same person you can count of one hand … they asked about the medications stuff but even filling that form was a nightmare. Sorry … It was a real nightmare. (Female, 53 years old, soft tissue – neck and back) www.medicaljournals.se/jrm g) Financial impacts. Clients also reported financial consequences from inadequate reimbursement of costs for treatment received and from an inability to undertake paid employment to the same extent as they were under- taking pre-accident. Reduced working hours following the accident was in most cases the result of physical injury. Some clients reported that it was very difficult for them to find a new job after the injury due to their disabilities, while other reported being out of pocket due to the misunderstandings on their entitlement under the compensation system. For the first 3 months I was paying all out of my pockets because they said they need like 12 weeks or something before they can step in. And then after that $600 … yes that’s right I had to pay $600 and after that they started paying for my GP. And then they said it was too much and even though my GP and physio said I need these services they said it’s too much and they won’t pay for it anymore. (Female, 45 years old, soft tissue – neck and shoulder) DISCUSSION This research highlighted that recovery is a complex phenomenon, regardless of the severity of injury at- tained. Specifically, it demonstrated some advantages of using the compensation benefits, but highlighted numerous challenges in navigating the system and using compensated services. The findings highlighted numerous complexities in- volved in compensation service delivery, especially for clients dealing with chronic pain and psychopathology, which often present as vague conditions problematic to definitively diagnose and adequately treat. It has been acknowledged that there are multiple challen- ges when dealing with people with chronic pain and mental health conditions (23, 24), which are common comorbidities after any road trauma. Previous studies have shown that these challenges commonly lead to trust issues between clients and other professionals and impact the quality of care received (25, 26). Unfortunately, there is still scarcity of qualitative studies on people with minor injuries and protracted recovery, but few studies that have explored this in- depth have described similar results to this study. A recent study led by Ritchie et al. (27) which focused on patients suffering whiplash associated disorder (WAD) stated that many participants described complexities in navigating and understanding recovery processes incurred by interactions with compensation and fun- ding systems (27). Another qualitative study carried out in Sweden found that medically classified minor and moderate injuries have a long-lasting and detrimental impact on patients’ quality of life (28). Therefore, it seems that certain complexities are expected during recovery, but the question is how to