Across medicine, new therapies are shifting treatment from clinic to home settings. At-home subcutaneous immunoglobulin treatment for immunodeficiency is an example of one such therapy. In this qualitative interview study, we investigated experiences of patients living an everyday life with subcutaneous immunoglobulin at-home treatment.

24 Danish patients participated in semistructured interviews. Six patients were interviewed in individual home-visit interviews, while the remaining 18 participated in one of six subsequent group interviews using an online video format. Participants represented three patient groups: patients with primary immunodeficiency, patients with secondary immunodeficiency, and patients with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy or multifocal motor neuropathy.

According to the interviewed patients, at-home treatment provided a high degree of flexibility and freedom in everyday life. When transitioning to at-home treatment, a sense of security had been achieved through individualised training and access to healthcare professionals. Some patients experienced uncertainty or insecurity during the initial period of administering treatment at home; however, this typically receded over time. For the patients, at-home treatment had become embedded in everyday life either through incorporation into existing everyday routines or through the development of new routines. The time-related and place-related flexibility of the at-home treatment had benefits for several arenas of everyday life: work, family, and leisure. Patients associated at-home treatment with a sense of freedom, which they ascribed both to independence from the hospital and to not being confronted with medical conditions and other patients in the hospital setting. A small minority of the patients viewed the reduced contact with healthcare professionals as a disadvantage, describing feelings of being alone and responsible for their treatment.

Patients who had established at-home treatment routines in their everyday lives found the benefits of at-home treatment to outweigh the challenges.

To explore differences in health-related benefit status over 3 years, focusing on patterns of sick leave, work assessment allowance and disability benefits, between people who underwent rehabilitation and a matched control group.

Prospective longitudinal multicentre cohort study using registry data over three consecutive years.

Secondary specialist rehabilitation services at 17 institutions across Norway.

Patients (n=2710), 42% with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases, aged 18–65 years referred for multidisciplinary rehabilitation at one of the participating institutions. They were propensity score matched with 37 760 controls from the national sick leave registry, based on sociodemographic factors and health-related benefit status.

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes, commonly lasting 3 weeks (range: 1 week to 6 months), tailored to individual needs.

Days on health-related benefits (sick leave, work assessment allowance (WAA) and disability benefits) were quantified as lost workdays per month. Differences between groups were analysed using Generalised Estimating Equations across three consecutive years: the year before rehabilitation, the rehabilitation year and the year after rehabilitation.

The rehabilitation group had more days on health-related benefits per month than controls throughout the observation period. During the rehabilitation year, they had on average 1.7 more days on sick leave (95 % CI 1.3 to 1.9), 2.3 more WAA days (95% CI 1.9 to 2.7) and 0.2 more days on disability benefits (95% CI 0.1 to 0.3). In the year after rehabilitation, they had 0.6 fewer days on sick leave (95% CI –0.8 to –0.3), but 3.7 more days on WAA (95% CI 3.1 to 4.2) and 0.6 more days on disability benefits (95% CI 0.4 to 0.8). Patterns were similar for the subgroup with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

People undergoing rehabilitation had more days on health-related benefits and a greater increase in long-term benefits, even after matching, indicating a higher disease and support burden than controls. Tailoring interventions and health-related benefits is an essential aspect of rehabilitation for people with complex work participation needs. Future research should include longer observation periods to explore long-term outcomes of rehabilitation.

NCT03764982