Effectiveness of a tailored return to work program for cancer survivors with job loss: results of a randomized controlled trial

Elements of Return-to-Work Interventions for Workers on Long-Term Sick Leave: A Systematic Literature Review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review is to identify vocational rehabilitation (VR) interventions that are effective to enhance return-to-work (RTW) for people on long-term sick leave (> 90 days) and to identify main elements of these interventions.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched for peer-reviewed studies published up to February 2022. Each article was screened independently by two different reviewers. Thereafter, one author performed the data-extraction which was checked by another author. The EPHPP quality assessment tool was used to appraise the methodological quality of the studies.

RESULTS

11.837 articles were identified. 21 articles were included in the review, which described 25 interventions. Results showed that ten interventions were more effective than usual care on RTW. Two interventions had mixed results. The effective interventions varied widely in content, but were often more extensive than usual care. Common elements of the effective interventions were: coaching, counseling and motivational interviewing, planning return to work, placing the worker in work or teaching practical skills and advising at the workplace. However, these elements were also common in interventions that were not effective on RTW compared to usual care and can therefore not explain why certain interventions are effective and others are not.

CONCLUSION

The effective interventions included in this study were often quite extensive and aimed at multiple phases of the RTW-process of the worker. In the future, researchers need to describe the population and the content of the investigated interventions more elaborate to be able to better compare VR interventions and determine what elements make interventions effective.

Effectiveness of a mobile-based return to work program for decent return to work, fatigue, stress, and quality of working life among cancer survivors

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop a smartphone mobile application-based supportive return to work (RTW) program for cancer survivors and evaluate its effects on their RTW, fatigue, stress, and quality of working life. This program was developed through a comprehensive process involving literature review, interviews with cancer survivors, and consultations with experts.

METHODS

A non-equivalent control group pre- and post-test design was used, with 41 participants assigned to the experimental (n = 18) and control (n = 23) groups based on recruitment timing. The experimental group received a 6-week smartphone mobile application-based supportive RTW program comprising "Counseling and Education" and "Self-Management." Participants completed assessments of decent RTW, fatigue, stress, and quality of working life at baseline and 6 months later. The experimental group completed an additional post-program completion survey.

RESULTS

During the 6-week program, no experimental group participants dropped out. The program's impact on decent RTW remains unclear. Fatigue (F = 2.52, p = 0.095) and quality of working life (F = 0.86, p = 0.434) did not show statistically significant differences. However, there was a significant reduction in stress (F = 4.59, p = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

The smartphone application-based RTW program, focusing on self-management and counseling, effectively reduced participants' stress levels. To further evaluate the effectiveness of the program, a more diverse range of interventions and ongoing programs should be implemented.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

This study underscores the importance of tailored digital interventions to support the RTW of cancer survivors. The use of mobile smartphone applications allows temporal and spatial flexibility in program participation. Interventions involving various activities should be implemented to ensure ongoing participation.

Effects of a self-managed return to work intervention for colorectal cancer survivors: A prospective randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The present study aims to assess the efficacy of stage-matched, self-managed Return to Work (RTW) interventions in enhancing RTW outcomes among colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors.

METHODS

This trial, conducted in South Korea, enrolled 58 unemployed survivors of colorectal cancer. Participants were randomly assigned to either an experimental or a control group. The experimental group received a self-managed return-to-work intervention based on the trans-theoretical model, while the control group received an educational booklet. Assessments were conducted at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months to measure changes in various factors including return-to-work status and HRQOL.

RESULTS

In the experimental group, 28 participants were randomly assigned, while 30 individuals were allocated to the control group. The experimental group exhibited a higher proportion of individuals achieving RTW (64.5% vs 39.3%, p = 0.013) and demonstrated greater improvements in work ability (p = 0.001), RTW self-efficacy (p = 0.035), readiness for RTW in the prepared-for-action (p < 00.0001), uncertain maintenance (p = 0.033), and proactive maintenance (p < 00.0001) stages, quality of working life (p = 0.003), HRQOL (p < 0.05), and illness perception (p < 0.05) compared to the control group at the 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Stage-matched self-managed RTW interventions incorporating TTM principles may effectively enhance RTW outcomes and work ability among CRC survivors.

Psychosocial interventions that target adult cancer survivors' reintegration into daily life after active cancer treatment: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This review explored psychosocial interventions targeting adult cancer survivors' reintegration following active cancer treatment. This included the types of interventions tested and the tools used to measure reintegration.

INTRODUCTION

Cancer survivors face lingering health issues following the completion of cancer treatment. Many cancer survivors still experience unmet psychosocial care needs despite receiving follow-up care. Further, many survivorship interventions do not specifically address outcomes important to survivors. A number of primary studies have identified reintegration as an outcome important to cancer survivors. Reintegration is a concept that focuses on returning to normal activities, routines, and social roles after cancer treatment; however, it is emerging and abstract.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies involving adult cancer survivors (18 years or older at diagnosis) of any cancer type or stage were included in this review. Studies with psychosocial interventions targeted at reintegrating the person into daily life after cancer treatment were included. Interventions addressing clinical depression or anxiety, and interventions treating solely physical needs that were largely medically focused were excluded.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and Embase. Gray literature was searched using ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (ProQuest). Reference lists of included studies were searched. Studies were screened at the title/abstract and full-text levels, and 2 independent reviewers extracted data. Manuscripts in languages other than English were excluded due to feasibility (eg, cost, time of translations). Findings were summarized narratively and reported in tabular and diagrammatic format.

RESULTS

The 3-step search strategy yielded 5617 citations. After duplicates were removed, the remaining 4378 citations were screened at the title and abstract level, then the remaining 306 citations were evaluated at the full-text level by 2 independent reviewers. Forty studies were included that evaluated psychosocial interventions among adult cancer survivors trying to reintegrate after active cancer treatment (qualitative n=23, mixed methods n=8, quantitative n=8, systematic review n=1). Included articles spanned 10 different countries/regions. Over half of all included articles (n=25) focused primarily on breast cancer survivors. Many studies (n=17) were conducted in primary care or community-based settings. The most common types of interventions were peer-support groups (n=14), follow-up education and support (n=14), exercise programs (n=6), and multidisciplinary/multicomponent programs (n=6). While the majority of included studies characterized the outcome qualitatively, 9 quantitative tools were also employed.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified 6 types of interventions to reintegrate survivors back into their daily lives following cancer treatment. An important thread across intervention types was a focus on personalization in the form of problem/goal identification. Given the number of qualitative studies, future research could include a qualitative systematic review and meta-aggregation. Quantitative tools may not be as effective for evaluating reintegration. More primary studies, including mixed methods studies, utilizing consistent measurement tools are required. Furthermore, this work provides a basis for future research to continue examining the complexity of implementing such interventions to successfully achieve reintegration. To do so, primary studies evaluating interventions from an implementation science and complex systems perspective would be useful.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework https://osf.io/r6bmx.

Tailored vocational rehabilitation for people with a work disability pension in The Netherlands; an in-depth data analysis of the content and outcomes of vocational rehabilitation trajectories of the Social Security Institute

PURPOSE

People with a work disability pension receive vocational rehabilitation (VR) services from the Dutch Social Security Institute (SSI) in order to facilitate return-to-work (RTW). The SSI offers tailored VR existing of two trajectories (aimed at getting fit for work or aimed at returning to work). The purpose of this study is to describe the current practice of VR. This includes a description of client characteristics, RTW barriers and the intensity, duration, content and the outcomes of the offered trajectories.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed data from 197 clients that were randomly selected from clients who attended a VR trajectory between 1 January t 2017 and 31 December 2018. Data were obtained from the SSI registration databases and client files.

RESULTS

Both VR trajectories at the SSI have a different aim, but in practice the content of the VR interventions often overlaps. Around half of both trajectories reached their goal. Reasons for unsuccessful trajectories were that the client did not find work or barriers were more complex than initially assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

The SSI delivers tailored VR to the specific needs of the client, however substantiations for why a certain VR intervention is offered are limited. Guidelines are needed to support professionals.

Non-medical interventions to enhance return to work for people with cancer

BACKGROUND

People with cancer are 1.4 times more likely to be unemployed than people without a cancer diagnosis. Therefore, it is important to investigate whether programmes to enhance the return-to-work (RTW) process for people who have been diagnosed with cancer are effective. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011 and updated in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of non-medical interventions aimed at enhancing return to work (RTW) in people with cancer compared to alternative programmes including usual care or no intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and three trial registers up to 18 August 2021. We also examined the reference lists of included studies and selected reviews, and contacted authors of relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs on the effectiveness of psycho-educational, vocational, physical or multidisciplinary interventions enhancing RTW in people with cancer. The primary outcome was RTW measured as either RTW rate or sick leave duration measured at 12 months' follow-up. The secondary outcome was quality of life (QoL).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed RCTs for inclusion, extracted data and rated certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We pooled study results judged to be clinically homogeneous in different comparisons reporting risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for RTW and mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs for QoL.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 RCTs involving 1477 people with cancer with 19 evaluations because of multiple treatment groups. In this update, we added eight new RCTs and excluded seven RCTs from the previous versions of this review that were aimed at medical interventions. All included RCTs were conducted in high-income countries, and most were aimed at people with breast cancer (nine RCTs) or prostate cancer (two RCTs). Risk of bias We judged nine RCTs at low risk of bias and six at high risk of bias. The most common type of bias was a lack of blinding (9/15 RCTs). Psycho-educational interventions We found four RCTs comparing psycho-educational interventions including patient education and patient counselling versus care as usual. Psycho-educational interventions probably result in little to no difference in RTW compared to care as usual (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.24; 4 RCTs, 512 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that in the intervention and control groups, approximately 625 per 1000 participants may have returned to work. The psycho-educational interventions may result in little to no difference in QoL compared to care as usual (MD 1.47, 95% CI -2.38 to 5.32; 1 RCT, 124 participants; low-certainty evidence). Vocational interventions We found one RCT comparing vocational intervention versus care as usual. The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of a vocational intervention on RTW compared to care as usual (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13; 1 RCT, 34 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report QoL. Physical interventions Four RCTs compared a physical intervention programme versus care as usual. These physical intervention programmes included walking, yoga or physical exercise. Physical interventions likely increase RTW compared to care as usual (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.39; 4 RCTs, 434 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that in the intervention group probably 677 to 871 per 1000 participants RTW compared to 627 per 1000 in the control group (thus, 50 to 244 participants more RTW). Physical interventions may result in little to no difference in QoL compared to care as usual (SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.32; 1 RCT, 173 participants; low-certainty evidence). The SMD translates back to a 1.8-point difference (95% CI -7.54 to 3.97) on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Multidisciplinary interventions Six RCTs compared multidisciplinary interventions (vocational counselling, patient education, patient counselling, physical exercises) to care as usual. Multidisciplinary interventions likely increase RTW compared to care as usual (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.33; 6 RCTs, 497 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that in the intervention group probably 694 to 844 per 1000 participants RTW compared to 625 per 1000 in the control group (thus, 69 to 217 participants more RTW). Multidisciplinary interventions may result in little to no difference in QoL compared to care as usual (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.28; 3 RCTs, 378 participants; low-certainty evidence). The SMD translates back to a 1.4-point difference (95% CI -2.58 to 5.36) on the EORTC QLQ-C30.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Physical interventions (four RCTs) and multidisciplinary interventions (six RCTs) likely increase RTW of people with cancer. Psycho-educational interventions (four RCTs) probably result in little to no difference in RTW, while the evidence from vocational interventions (one RCT) is very uncertain. Psycho-educational, physical or multidisciplinary interventions may result in little to no difference in QoL. Future research on enhancing RTW in people with cancer involving multidisciplinary interventions encompassing a physical, psycho-educational and vocational component is needed, and be preferably tailored to the needs of the patient.

Effects of a return to work program on the health and barriers to returning to work in head and neck cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial

Objective

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of a return to work (RTW) program on perceived health status, barriers to returning to work, fear of cancer progression, social support, physical function, and psychosocial function in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial with repeated measures was conducted. The 70 HNC patients were randomly assigned into two groups: 35 in the experimental group (RTW) and 35 in the control group (usual care). Patients were assessed at four time points: baseline (T0) (6 months after completing treatment), and then at 9-, 12-, and 15-months (T1, T2, and T3, respectively) after completing treatment. Patients completed a self-reported questionnaire, including measures of perceived health status, barriers to returning to work, fear of cancer progression, social support, physical function, and psychosocial function.

Results

Patients in the experimental group had significantly greater perceived health status and better psychosocial function compared to those in the control group. Compared to T0, at T4, participants in both groups had significantly lower levels of barriers to returning to work, fear of cancer progression, social support, and higher levels of physical function.

Conclusions

The RTW program effectively improved perceived health status and psychosocial function in HNC patients. Survivorship care should include a transitional return-to-work program to help patients transition back to work.

Trial registration

NCT04322695.

Tools to assess employment readiness for colorectal cancer survivors: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The ability to return to work and remain at work is an important recovery milestone after a cancer diagnosis. With the projected number of colorectal cancer patients of working age likely to increase, it is important to identify when a person is ready to resume work. There are many employment-related tools available to help people return to work after injury or illness; however, it is unknown which may be suitable for a person with colorectal cancer.

AIM

To identify tools related to employment readiness in colorectal cancer survivors and to chart the relevant factors of employment assessed by these tools.

METHOD

Literature searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase and Medline, the Cochrane library and PsycINFO using search terms around cancer, survivorship and employment to identify all peer-reviewed articles published in English up to June 2022.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies used a total of 77 tools focused on assessing employment issues experienced by people with cancer in general. Four tools were used with colorectal cancer survivors. None considered all relevant employment-related factors for colorectal cancer survivors.

CONCLUSION

Tools used to identify return-to-work and remain-at-work were not specific to colorectal cancer. There are a range of existing tools that collate some, but not all, of the domains and outcome criteria required to meet the employment needs of colorectal cancer survivors. To optimize work outcomes for the working colorectal cancer population, a specified tool is warranted.

Interventions for work participation of unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors: a systematic review

Background: Supporting unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors in their work participation can have extensive individual and societal benefits. We aimed to identify and summarise interventions for work participation of unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors.Methods: Five databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for quantitative studies on interventions aimed at enhancing work participation of unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors. Work participation refers to participation in the workforce, fulfilling one's work role. Manual and automatic screening (with ASReview software) were performed on titles and abstracts, followed by manual full-text screening. Data were extracted regarding study, patient and intervention characteristics, and work participation outcomes. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 and QUIPS tools.Results: We identified 10,771 articles, of which we included two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of which one feasibility RCT, and three cohort studies. In total, 1862 cancer survivors were included, with predominantly breast cancer. Work participation was mainly measured as time to return to work (RTW) and RTW rate. Interventions included components of coaching (e.g., psychological or rehabilitation), training (e.g., building confidence and managing fatigue) and self-management. Two RCTs with unclear RoB did not show an effect of multicomponent interventions compared to care as usual. One cohort study found a significant effect of a psycho-educational intervention on RTW rates, with moderate RoB. The other two cohort studies, with moderate RoB, reported significant associations between components including job search and placement assistance, and work participation.Discussion: Only few interventions aimed at enhancing work participation of unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors, have been evaluated. In two cohort studies, promising components for future multicomponent interventions were identified. However, findings suggest that more evidence is necessary on such multicomponent interventions, in which elements explicitly directed at work and including the workplace should be included.

Cancer survivors and adverse work outcomes: associated factors and supportive interventions

INTRODUCTION

The number of cancer survivors in a working age is rising. An awareness of factors associated with adverse work outcomes, and of supportive interventions, is needed.

SOURCES OF DATA

A narrative review of research obtained via several databases, including Medline and PsycINFO, was conducted.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

A range of factors is associated with adverse work outcomes such as prolonged sick leave, delayed return to work, disability pension and unemployment in cancer survivors. They include the cancer type and treatment, fatigue, cognitive functioning, work factors and elements of health care systems. Effective supportive interventions encompass physical and multicomponent interventions.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

The role of behaviour determinants and legislative and insurance systems is unclear. It is furthermore uncertain what the optimal timing of delivering supportive interventions is.

GROWING POINTS

Further focus on vulnerable groups, including specific cancer types and those with lower income, lower educational level and in precarious employment, is needed.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

Recent developments are tailored and timely interventions.

Systematic Review of Functional Outcomes in Cancer Rehabilitation

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the evidence regarding rehabilitation interventions targeting optimal physical or cognitive function in adults with a history of cancer and describe the breadth of evidence as well as strengths and limitations across a range of functional domains.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Plus, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. The time scope was January 2008 to April 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Prospective, controlled trials including single- and multiarm cohorts investigating rehabilitative interventions for cancer survivors at any point in the continuum of care were included, if studies included a primary functional outcome measure. Secondary data analyses and pilot/feasibility studies were excluded. Full-text review identified 362 studies for inclusion.

DATA EXTRACTION

Extraction was performed by coauthor teams and quality and bias assessed using the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Classification of Evidence Scheme (class I-IV).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Studies for which the functional primary endpoint achieved significance were categorized into 9 functional areas foundational to cancer rehabilitation: (1) quality of life (109 studies), (2) activities of daily living (61 studies), (3) fatigue (59 studies), (4) functional mobility (55 studies), (5) exercise behavior (37 studies), (6) cognition (20 studies), (7) communication (10 studies), (8) sexual function (6 studies), and (9) return to work (5 studies). Most studies were categorized as class III in quality/bias. Averaging results found within each of the functional domains, 71% of studies reported statistically significant results after cancer rehabilitation intervention(s) for at least 1 functional outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide evidence supporting the efficacy of rehabilitative interventions for individuals with a cancer history. The findings should be balanced with the understanding that many studies had moderate risk of bias and/or limitations in study quality by AAN criteria. These results may provide a foundation for future work to establish clinical practice guidelines for rehabilitative interventions across cancer disease types.

Residual work capacity and (in)ability to work fulltime among a year cohort of cancer survivors who claim a disability benefit

PURPOSE

Residual work capacity (RWC) and inability to work fulltime (IWF) are important outcomes in disability benefit assessments for workers diagnosed with cancer. The aim of this study is to gain insight into the prevalence of both outcomes, the associations of disease-related and socio-demographic factors and if these differ across cancer diagnosis groups.

METHODS

A year cohort of anonymized register data of cancer survivors who claim a disability benefit after 2 years of sick leave (n = 3690, age 53.3 ± 8.8, 60.4% female) was used. Having no RWC was defined as having no possibilities to perform any work at all, whereas IWF was defined as being able to work less than 8 h per day.

RESULTS

The prevalence of being assessed with no RWC was 42.6%. Of the applicants with RWC (57.4%), 69.8% were assessed with IWF. Cancers of the respiratory organs showed the highest odds for having no RWC, whereas lymphoid and haematopoietic cancers showed the highest odds for IWF. Within specific cancer diagnosis groups, different associations were identified for both outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of no RWC and IWF in applicants of work disability benefits diagnosed with cancer is high compared to the prevalence in other diagnoses. The odds for no RWC, IWF, and associated factors differ per cancer diagnosis group.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Being diagnosed with cancer has an enormous impact on work (dis)ability. Our results show that 2 years after being diagnosed with cancer, the majority of the disability benefit applicants are assessed with RWC; however, only 15% of all applicants with cancer had a normal ability to work fulltime, and therefore, it is of great importance to accompany them in their return to work.

A Digital Coaching Intervention for Cancer Survivors With Job Loss: Retrospective Study

Background

Returning to work is a key unmet need for working-age cancer survivors.

Objective

This study sought to evaluate return-to-work outcomes of a multidisciplinary intervention provided as routine employee support.

Methods

In a retrospective cohort analysis, patients with cancer and more than 3 months of absence from work were provided with an intervention consisting of digital resources and calls with a health coach. Propensity score matching was used to define a similar cohort of cancer patients absent from work, who were not offered the coaching intervention. The return-to-work rate as a percentage of all participants and secondary outcomes, such as the rate of death, were measured. The median time to return to work was compared between the cohorts using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

A total of 220 participants were enrolled in the intervention, of which 125 met the criteria for analysis. The median follow-up from cancer diagnosis was 79 weeks (IQR 60-106 weeks). In the matched control group, 22 (17.6%) participants returned to work compared with 38 (30.4%) in the intervention group (P=.02). Additionally, 19 (15.2%) matched controls died prior to claim closure compared with 13 (10.4%) in the intervention group (P=.26). The Kaplan-Meier estimated median time for the first 15% of the cohort to return to work was 87.1 weeks (95% CI 60.0-109.1 weeks) for the matched control group compared with 70.6 weeks (95% CI 52.6-79.6 weeks; P=.08) for the intervention group.

Conclusions

Patients receiving a remotely delivered coaching program in a real-world setting returned to work at a higher frequency than did control participants receiving usual care.

Exploration of interventions to enhance return-to-work for cancer patients: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

With the increasing incidence and earlier onset of cancer, more and more cancer patients are facing the problems of return-to-work. This review is to explore the types, contents, and results of return-to-work interventions for cancer patients.

METHODS

This scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework and PRISMA-ScR List. Three Chinese databases and five English databases were searched from the establishment of databases to 31 March, 2021. Article selection and data extraction were conducted by two researchers.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies and 1916 cancer patients with mainly breast and gastrointestinal cancer were included. According to the contents, interventions could be divided into four types: (1) physical interventions (n = 6), including high-intensity exercise, low-to-moderate intensity exercise, yoga, and upper limb functional training, (2) psychological interventions (n = 2), including early active individualized psychosocial support and mindfulness-based recovery, (3) vocational interventions (n = 14), including making work plans, educational leaflets, vocational consultations, electronic health intervention, and interventions targeting at employers, (4) multidisciplinary interventions (n = 10), including any combination of above interventions. Physical exercises, making working plans, vocational consultations, educational leaflets, two combinations of vocational and physical interventions were validated to have positive results in enhancing cancer patients' return-to-work.

CONCLUSIONS

Return-to-work interventions for cancer patients are diversified and can be divided into physical, psychological, vocational, and multidisciplinary interventions. Medical staffs can utilize physical exercises, making working plans, vocational consultation, educational leaflets, combinations of vocational and physical interventions to enhance cancer patients' return-to-work. Other interventions still need to be developed and validated.

The assessment of returning to work following treatment and the associated personal, disease, and treatment factors among breast cancer survivors in central China

Purpose

To assess the status of returning to work (RTW) following breast cancer treatment and to explore its associated factors among female patients.

Methods

Four-hundred-forty-two eligible patients admitted in a tertiary hospital since 2012 were followed up in 2018. Information about working status after treatment, date of RTW or reason for not RTW was obtained during a 30-min interview. Patients’ sociodemographic, disease, and treatment characteristics were retrieved from the hospital record. Overall prevalence rate and probability of RTW during the follow-up were estimated using Kaplan–Meier method. Factors associated with RTW were identified using regression analyses.

Results

Three-hundred-ninety-six patients (89.6%) completed the follow-up. The median follow-up was 31 months. Among them, 141 patents (35.6%) RTW of whom 68.1% (n = 96) were back within 12 months after cancer treatment. The reported reasons for not RTW included: prolonged fatigue, low self-esteem, lack of support from family and working unit, or voluntarily quitting. Patients aged under 50 years, being single, having higher level of education, not having extensive axillary node procedure, or without any comorbidities were more likely to RTW.

Conclusion

The rate of RTW after cancer treatment in this cohort was lower than those reported in others. Both personal and treatment factors were associated with RTW.

Municipal return to work management in cancer survivors: a controlled intervention study

INTRODUCTION

Resuming work during or after cancer treatment has become an important target in cancer rehabilitation.

PURPOSE

The aim was in a controlled trial to study the return to work (RTW) effect of an early, individually tailored vocational rehabilitation intervention targeted to improve readiness for RTW in cancer survivors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Participants diagnosed with breast, cervix, ovary, testicular, colon-rectal, and head-and-neck cancers as well as being employed were allocated to a vocational rehabilitation intervention provided by municipal social workers (n = 83) or to usual municipal RTW management (n = 264). The intervention contained three elements: motivational communication inspired by Acceptance and Commitment Therapy by which RTW barriers were addressed, municipal cancer rehabilitation and finally employer and workplace contact. RTW effect was assessed as relative cumulative incidence proportions (RCIP) in the control and intervention group within 52 weeks of follow-up, estimated from the week where treatment ended at the hospital. RCIP was interpreted and reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for gender, age cancer diagnosis, education, comorbidity, and sick leave weeks.

RESULTS

Across cancer diagnoses 69 (83.1%) and 215 (81.4%) returned to work in the intervention and control group, respectively. No statistical effect was seen (RR 1.08 (95% CI 0.98-1.19)). Repeating the analyses solely for participants with breast cancer (n = 290) showed a significant effect of the intervention (RR 1.12 (95% CI 1.01-1.23)).

CONCLUSION

More than 80% returned to work in both groups. However, no statistical difference in RTW effect was seen across cancer diagnoses within one year from being exposed to an early, individually tailored vocational rehabilitation intervention compared with usual municipal RTW management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN50753764.

Cross-cultural translation and adaptation of the Readiness for Return To Work questionnaire for Dutch cancer survivors

OBJECTIVE

Effective interventions supporting cancer survivors in work participation are lacking, possibly due to the poor fit between interventions and cancer survivors' needs. The 'Readiness for Return To Work' (RRTW) questionnaire could facilitate intervention development tailored to cancer survivors' needs. We performed a cross-cultural translation and adaptation of this questionnaire into Dutch and pre-tested its psychometric properties among cancer survivors.

METHODS

Questionnaire translation and adaptation were conducted using a systematic approach of: forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, consolidation of translations with an expert committee, and pre-testing. Pre-testing consisted of interviewing 40 cancer survivors, who completed the questionnaire.

RESULTS

The translated and adapted RRTW questionnaire showed reasonable psychometric properties, that is high item-to-stage correlations and internal consistency for all RRTW stages, except for the prepared for action - self-evaluative stage.

CONCLUSIONS

The translated and adapted RRTW questionnaire may be useful for tailoring interventions to support cancer survivors in returning to and maintaining at work. However, some items showed poor psychometric properties and several factors, important for work participation, are not captured, for example personal, disease-, treatment- and/or work-related characteristics. We recommend to further test the RRTW questionnaire and to use it in combination with additional measurement instruments when developing tailored work participation interventions.

A return-to-work intervention protocol directed at cancer patients (self-assessment, tailored information & lifestyle management for returning to work among cancer patients, START): A multi-center, randomized controlled trial

Purpose

This study describes the protocol for the design and evaluation of a self-assessment based educational program supporting cancer patients’ return-to-work (RTW), prior to its complete and ongoing implementation.

Methods

We designed a multi-center, randomized controlled trial with three follow-up points. The study population (N = 239) includes recently diagnosed cancer patients who plan to receive active treatment at two university hospitals in Korea. A pre-test is conducted at the point of enrollment for both groups. The intervention group receives a leaflet clarifying misconceptions about RTW and is shown a video clip of patient interviews concerning RTW. The control group receives a booklet about cancer and nutrition, and is not provided with further intervention. After active treatment, the intervention group receives a one-time, face-to-face education session with an oncology nurse. Following the education session, both groups receive three follow-up phone calls. The first follow-up call occurs at the end of intervention and at the end of active treatment for intervention and control groups, respectively. The next two follow-up calls will be conducted one month and a year following the post-test. The primary outcome is whether the patient has RTW or has plans to RTW, and the secondary outcome is knowledge of RTW.

Results

As of April 2020, 239 patients have been enrolled in the trial. Statistical analyses will be conducted upon trial completion in December 2020.

Discussion

We hypothesize that the provision of RTW education near diagnosis will not only enhance patients’ intentions to RTW, but also effectively encourage them to RTW.

An inventory of psychosocial oncological interventions in The Netherlands: identifying availability, gaps, and overlap in care provision

Purpose: While a wide range of psychosocial oncological (PO) interventions has been developed, a systematic overview of interventions to inform patients, care providers, as well as researchers, policy makers and health insurers, is lacking. The aims of this paper were (1) to describe the attainment of this overview, which may be used in other jurisdictions and for other health conditions and (2) to reflect on what determines developments in this field.Methods: Dutch researchers and care providers were invited to describe PO-interventions they apply in research or clinical practice. Selection criteria for what constituted a PO-intervention were determined. The input was organized in 12 predefined categories (e.g. physical functioning, genetics).Findings: Sixty-six PO-interventions were included in the overview. Two major categories were psychosocial functioning (24%) and physical functioning and recovery (24%). Interventions are mostly directed at adults (65%) and not aimed at a specific type of cancer (61%). Nearly 25% of the interventions lacked scientific underpinning.Conclusions: This paper provides an overview of Dutch PO-interventions and input on what drives their development. The categorizing method can be used in other jurisdictions and for other health care conditions. A next step would be to investigate the effectiveness and evidence of PO-interventions.Implications for Psychosocial Providers and Policy: The open access overview of interventions provides referral information for care providers. By identifying possible gaps and overlap, the overview looks at possible drivers behind developments in this field which will be of interest to policy makers.

Return to Work Interventions for Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and a Methodological Critique

Cancer patients are more at risk of being unemployed or having difficulties to return to work (RTW) compared to individuals without health concerns, and is thus a major public health issue. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and describe the interventions developed specifically to help cancer patients to RTW after treatment. Two researchers independently screened the articles for inclusion and Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) checklists were used to assess the methodology of the included studies. Ten manuscripts met the inclusion criteria. The type of studies were three quasi-experimental studies, three longitudinal studies, three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a qualitative study. RTW interventions were conducted in or outside the hospital (n = 6 and 3 respectively), or both (n = 1). Improvements in RTW were only observed in quasi-experimental studies. No improvement in RTW was noted in RCTs, nor in other measures (e.g., quality of life, fatigue). Lack of statistically significant improvement does not necessarily reflect reality, but may be attributed to non-adapted research methods. This systematic review underscores the need for researches in the RTW field to reach a consensus on RTW criteria and their assessment. Recommendations to this effect are suggested.

Functional Impairments and Work-Related Outcomes in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review

Purpose Work participation after breast cancer treatment is generally negatively affected. Occupational health professionals might improve work-related outcomes by bridging the gap between sick-listed employees' levels of functioning and work demands. To aid them in this task, this review explored the association between functional impairments and work-related outcomes in breast cancer survivors. Methods Publications from January 2000-March 2016 were identified through five online databases (i.e. Pubmed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library). Quantitative and qualitative studies were included if they focused on functional impairments and work-related outcomes in breast cancer survivors. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and performed quality assessment. Results The search identified 998 studies, of which 20 studies met eligibility criteria. Impairments in physical functioning negatively affected return to work (RTW) and work ability in quantitative and qualitative studies. Studies measuring cognitive functioning with tests found no association with work-related outcomes, whereas the results of studies using self-reported measures were ambiguous. Social functioning was less commonly investigated and findings differed across work-related outcomes. Emotional functioning was not associated with work-related outcomes in quantitative studies, while in qualitative studies feelings such as insecurity were described as influencing RTW. Conclusions Functional impairments can severely hamper work participation in breast cancer survivors. This provides important opportunities for occupational health professionals to enhance RTW in breast cancer survivors, such as adequately addressing illness perceptions and work expectations. Ongoing research is warranted to aid occupational health professionals in providing effective vocational guidance and improve work-related outcomes in breast cancer survivors.

Cancer-related cognitive impairment and patients' ability to work: a current perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

About half of all cancer survivors are 65 years of age or younger and potentially part of the labor force. Increasing numbers of these survivors are able to return to work (RTW) or even continue working during treatment. Many factors are known to inhibit occupational reintegration of cancer survivors, and further affect job performance after RTW. However, the impact of cancer-related cognitive impairment on work-related outcomes in cancer survivors is not well understood.

RECENT FINDINGS

Previous studies exploring cancer, cognition and the ability to work reported mixed results, because of inconsistency in the definitions of work-related outcomes, the use of self-reported rather than performance-based measurements and the interaction between cognitive limitations and other symptom burden, such as fatigue or job stress. In addition, a lack of interventions to specifically target cognitive problems at work was identified.

SUMMARY

Cognitive problems because of cancer diagnosis and treatment demand action in terms of developing a better understanding of their impact on the ability to work, as well as identifying effective therapeutic interventions to diminish this impact, including innovative accommodations, changes in work tasks or organization and ergonomic adjustments. Both employers and survivors should welcome such changes, to rise to the challenge of successfully adapting from the precancer status quo.

Management of work through the seasons of cancer survivorship

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Survival from cancer has expanded enormously over the past decades. It is estimated that 40-50% of all cancer survivors are of working age at time of diagnosis and thus potentially part of the labor force. The seasons of survivorship can be used as a steppingstone to describe issues regarding employability survivors are dealing with.

RECENT FINDINGS

The acute survival stage begins at the point of diagnosis. Disclosure of diagnosis, and flexibility of both employers and (occupational) healthcare professionals are important factors in this stage. Extended survival starts when the survivor has completed the basic course of treatment. Survivors become aware that the old normality at work will be difficult to achieve. Problems like fear of recurrence, cognitive, and physical limitations might intensify during this stage and affect work ability. Permanent survival can be called long-term remission. Prospective studies on work-related outcomes and work-related interventions in this stage are rare.

SUMMARY

It is important to improve our understanding of the seasons of survival and to explore concepts, such as employability, against the background of these seasons. This perspective may help both survivors and (occupational) healthcare professionals to develop better strategies for dealing with the difficult life event cancer represents in each specific stage.