The Successful Return-To-Work Questionnaire for Cancer Survivors (I-RTW_CS): Development, Validity and Reproducibility

The SME tool supporting employers of small- and medium-sized enterprises during the return to work of employees on long-term sick leave: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial and for a process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Returning to work after long-term sick leave can be challenging, particularly in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) where support may be limited. Recognizing the responsibilities and challenges of SME employers, a web-based intervention (hereafter the SME tool) has been developed. The SME tool aims to enhance the employer's intention and ability to support the sick-listed employee. Based on the Self-Determination Theory, it is hypothesized that this intention is enhanced by intervening in the employer's autonomy, competences, and relatedness targeted at, e.g., communication with sick-listed employee, involvement of other stakeholders, and practical support. This is achieved by means of providing templates, communication videos, and information on legislation. This article describes the design of an effect and process evaluation of the SME tool.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a 6-month follow-up will be conducted with a parallel-group design with two arms: an intervention group and a control group. Sick-listed employees (≤ 8 weeks) of SMEs (≤ 250 employees) at risk of long-term sick leave and their employers will be recruited and randomly allocated as a dyad (1:1). Employers randomized to the intervention group receive unlimited access to the SME tool, while those in the control group will receive care as usual. The primary outcome is the satisfaction of the employee with the return to work (RTW) support provided by their employer. Secondary outcomes include social support, work performance, and quality of work life at the employee level and self-efficacy in providing RTW support at the employer level. Outcomes will be assessed using questionnaires at baseline and 1, 3, and 6 months of follow-up. Process evaluation measures include, e.g., recruitment and use of and perceived usefulness of the SME tool. Additionally, semi-structured interviews with employers, employees, and occupational physicians will explore the interpretation of the RCT results and strategies for the national implementation of the SME tool.

DISCUSSION

The SME tool is hypothesized to be valuable in addition to usual care helping employers to effectively support the RTW of their long-term sick-listed employees, by improving the employers' intention and ability to support.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06330415. Registered on February 14, 2024.

Development and validation of Adaptability to Return-to-Work Scale (ARTWS) for cancer patients

Introduction

The research on cancer patients returning to work in China is still in its infancy, and there is no research and discussion on the adaptability to return-to-work for cancer patients. It is critical to develop the Adaptability to Return-to-Work Scale (ARTWS) for cancer patients and evaluate its psychometric properties.

Methods

The items of the initial scale were compiled based on the theoretical model and literature review results. Through two rounds of Delphi expert consultation (N = 15) and a pilot survey (N = 40), the initial scale was further checked and revised. Conduct a large sample survey (N = 376) and the construct validity and reliability of the ARTWS were assessed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA).

Results

The final ARTWS consisted of 24 items. "Focusing on rehabilitation," "Rebuilding Self-efficiency," and "Adjusting plans" as common factors in determining adaptability to return to work for cancer patients, and the cumulative variance contribution rate for these three factors was 66.6%. The S-CVI of the total scale was 0.979. The Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.937 and the 2-week test-retest reliability was 0.814.

Discussion

ARTWS has good correlation validity and can be used as a tool to measure the adaptability of cancer patients' return to work. The presentation of the manuscript in Research Square (https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2323264/v1).

Quality of working life and adaptability of returning to work in nurse cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the relationship between quality of working life (QWL) and adaptability of returning to work (RTW) among nurse cancer survivors (NCSs).

METHOD

We conducted a cross-sectional study on nurses previously diagnosed with cancer. QWL was quantified using the Quality of Working Life Scale (QWL7-32), and the level of RTW adaptability was assessed using the Adaptability of Returning to Work for Cancer Survivors (ARTW-CS) scale. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to control for confounding factors, and a simple effect analysis was performed on the interaction term.

RESULTS

After controlling for sociodemographic, work-related, and health-related factors, the findings indicated a significant correlation between "adaptation and planning" and QWL score (p < 0.05). Further analysis revealed that "RTW gradualness" and "support seeking" had an interaction effect (p = 0.021). The simple effect analysis demonstrated that when the "RTW gradualness" score was ≥ 16 points, nurses with a high "support seeking" score (≥ 7 points) exhibited a significantly better QWL than those with a low "support seeking" score (< 7 points) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The interaction between "RTW gradualness" and "support seeking" in the ARTW-CS scale significantly impacted the QWL of the NCSs, underscoring the importance of implementing a gradual career plan and seeking support to enhance QWL.

The PRO-RCC study: a long-term PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort in the Netherlands, providing an infrastructure for 'Trial within Cohorts' study designs

BACKGROUND

Ongoing research in the field of both localized, locally advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma has resulted in the availability of multiple treatment options. Hence, many questions are still unanswered and await further research. A nationwide collaborative registry allows to collect corresponding data. For this purpose, the Dutch PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort (PRO-RCC) has been founded, for the prospective collection of long-term clinical data, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient reported experience measures (PREMs).

METHODS

PRO-RCC is designed as a multicenter cohort for all Dutch patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Recruitment will start in the Netherlands in 2023. Importantly, participants may also consent to participation in a 'Trial within cohorts' studies (TwiCs). The TwiCs design provides a method to perform (randomized) interventional studies within the registry. The clinical data collection is embedded in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Next to the standardly available data on RCC, additional clinical data will be collected. PROMS entail Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), symptom monitoring with optional ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of pain and fatigue, and optional return to work- and/or nutrition questionnaires. PREMS entail satisfaction with care. Both PROMS and PREMS are collected through the PROFILES registry and are accessible for the patient and the treating physician.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Ethical board approval has been obtained (2021_218) and the study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05326620).

DISCUSSION

PRO-RCC is a nationwide long-term cohort for the collection of real-world clinical data, PROMS and PREMS. By facilitating an infrastructure for the collection of prospective data on RCC, PRO-RCC will contribute to observational research in a real-world study population and prove effectiveness in daily clinical practice. The infrastructure of this cohort also enables that interventional studies can be conducted with the TwiCs design, without the disadvantages of classic RCTs such as slow patient accrual and risk of dropping out after randomization.

Applying the ICF codes, flag model and C-OAR-SE in the development of return-to-work assessment scale for stroke survivors

BACKGROUND

The Return-to-Work Assessment Scale (RAS) was developed in 2021 by Ibikunle et al. to assess return-to-work among post-stroke survivors.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe how the conceptual (flag model and ICF) and theoretical framework (C-OAR-SE) were used in developing the RAS.

METHOD

The development of the RAS consisted of three phases: (i) Initial item generation (ii) Face and content validity (iii) Psychometric testing. With each phase embracing the flag model, international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF) and the C-OAR-SE an acronym for the six aspects of the theory: 'C' [construct definition], 'OAR' [object representation, attribute classification, and rater entity identification], and 'SE' [selection of item type and answer scale, as well as, enumeration].

RESULTS

A triangulated approach drawn on three separate theories and models. Phase one was developed by using the flag model which provided the semi-structured open ended questions that materialized into the draft instrument while phases two and three were developed using the ICF and the C-OAR-SE. The scale consists of two sections, A and B. Section A comprises general information about post-stroke survivors, which would not be scored, while section B includes three parts that are important to consider when deciding to return-to-work.

CONCLUSION

An instrument called RAS was developed, an excellent, internally consistent, as well as reliable tool that has demonstrated good group and structural validity.

Psychological and educational support for cancer patients who return to work: A scoping review

BACKGROUND: Many patients with cancer experience challenges when they return to work (RTW) following cancer diagnosis and treatment. Psycho-educational support is important to facilitate the RTW process. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review examined published reports on psycho-educational support for patients with cancer who RTW. METHODS: We followed the preferred reported items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement and the framework of Arksey and O’Malley. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database, PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCO), and ICHUSHI and performed manual searches. RESULTS: We retrieved 1,586 articles and retained 48 for analysis (published January 2000 to December 2020). Physicians, occupational physicians, nurses, social workers, and psychologists provide considerable support in hospitals. Delivery modes included individual, face-to-face, and workbook. Psychological support included emotional, stress coping, counseling, and knowledge. Educational support included information or advice provision, communication skills, problem discussion, and work planning. Employment status was typically the primary outcome. We included 50 measurement scales across quality of life, cognitive functioning and illness, self-efficacy, psychological distress, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: This review elucidated psycho-educational support for patients with cancer who RTW, and measurement tools for related effects. Based on the characteristics of the psycho-educational support revealed in this study, future studies should examine the development, intervention, and implementation of support programs for patients’ RTW.

The Cross-Country Comparison Model for Labor Participation (CCC Model for LP) of Persons with Chronic Diseases

Purpose To design a model based on the three pillars of new institutional theory (NIT), that facilitates cross-country comparison of labor participation (LP) of people with chronic diseases. This model should support getting a comprehensive overview of factors representing country differences, understanding these differences and should support estimating cross-country transferability of policies and interventions in the context of Work Disability Prevention. Methods Based on NIT, a draft model was designed by means of (1) a literature review of empirical studies; (2) theoretical books and articles; (3) a focus group with six expert researchers. This draft model was (4) adapted in the context of academic education. Literature was searched on Web of Science and EBSCO host. Feedback on (use of) the model was received from the focus group, four different academic courses at 28 occasions and two international conferences. Results The cross-country comparison model for labor participation (CCC model for LP) of persons with chronic diseases is proposed consisting of five factors: (1) Legislation; (2) Norms & values in practice; (3) Culture; (4) Organization of WDP in practice; (5) Labor market characteristics. Within these factors and based on (in)direct empirical evidence, subfactors are distinguished. The feedback received led to renaming (sub) factors, improved visual representation and a tool for estimating transferability. Conclusions The CCC model for LP of persons with chronic diseases allows for a comprehensive understanding of country differences and cross-country transferability of policies and interventions. The CCC model can be used for other populations when population-specific subfactors are included.

Supporting the Return to Work of Breast Cancer Survivors: From a Theoretical to a Clinical Perspective

Promoting the return to work of breast cancer survivors is of major interest to patients, healthcare and occupational health professionals, companies, governments, and researchers worldwide. We previously conducted a French consensus study resulting in a model describing the multifactorial process of the return to work of breast cancer survivors (the REWORK-BC model). Other work has identified the transtheoretical model as a relevant theoretical framework for interventions to promote the return to work of cancer survivors. In this opinion paper, we provide a theoretically-based clinical framework describing how to support breast cancer survivors at each stage of the return-to-work process. This clinical framework considers several essential aspects of supportive care for breast cancer survivors returning to work, such as: (i) helping the patient actively self-manage, by considering her to be the main decision-maker; (ii) respecting and adapting to the patient’s choice of professional project; (iii) respecting the temporality of the patient’s choices; (iv) proposing tailored interventions; (v) implementing simple tools to promote the return to work, shared representation between the patient and a multidisciplinary team, and improvement of working conditions and the knowledge of health and occupational professionals, and managers or employers; and (vi) maintaining certain flexibility aimed at proposing, but never imposing, changes in practices. This clinical framework, specific to breast cancer survivors, could be extrapolated to other tumor types, offering a practical guide for healthcare and occupational health professionals to better understand the return-to-work process of cancer survivors. This clinical framework aims to be a usable tool for any hospital or cancer care center wishing to implement a patient-centered intervention that promotes returning to work, regardless of the country.

A randomised feasibility trial of an employer-based intervention for enhancing successful return to work of cancer survivors (MiLES intervention)

BACKGROUND

Employers express a need for support during sickness absence and return to work (RTW) of cancer survivors. Therefore, a web-based intervention (MiLES) targeted at employers with the objective of enhancing cancer survivors' successful RTW has been developed. This study aimed to assess feasibility of a future definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention. Also preliminary results on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention were obtained.

METHODS

A randomised feasibility trial of 6 months was undertaken with cancer survivors aged 18-63 years, diagnosed with cancer < 2 years earlier, currently in paid employment, and sick-listed < 1 year. Participants were randomised to an intervention group, with their employer receiving the MiLES intervention, or to a waiting-list control group (2:1). Feasibility of a future definitive RCT was determined on the basis of predefined criteria related to method and protocol-related uncertainties (e.g. reach, retention, appropriateness). The primary effect measure (i.e. successful RTW) and secondary effect measures (e.g. quality of working life) were assessed at baseline and 3 and 6 months thereafter.

RESULTS

Thirty-five cancer survivors were included via medical specialists (4% of the initially invited group) and open invitations, and thereafter randomised to the intervention (n = 24) or control group (n = 11). Most participants were female (97%) with breast cancer (80%) and a permanent employment contract (94%). All predefined criteria for feasibility of a future definitive RCT were achieved, except that concerning the study's reach (90 participants). After 6 months, 92% of the intervention group and 100% of the control group returned to work (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.81-1.03); no difference were found with regard to secondary effect measures.

CONCLUSIONS

With the current design a future definitive RCT on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention on successful RTW of cancer survivors is not feasible, since recruitment of survivors fell short of the predefined minimum for feasibility. There was selection bias towards survivors at low risk of adverse work outcomes, which reduced generalisability of the outcomes. An alternative study design is needed to study effectiveness of the MiLES intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study has been registered in the Dutch Trial Register ( NL6758/NTR7627 ).