Enhancing the Return to Work of Cancer Survivors: Development and Feasibility of the Nurse-Led eHealth Intervention Cancer@Work

[Investigation the contents of employment consultation and support in a cancer center hospital]

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to analyze and categorize the actual situation of employment consultation and support according to consultation times or employment status at the Consultation Support Center of the National Cancer Center Hospital of Japan.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the patient backgrounds, consultation contents, and the number of employment consultation cases conducted at the Consultation Support Center of the National Cancer Center Hospital during a 6-month period from May to December 2018.

RESULTS

During the study period, 117 patients (male: female = 46:71) visited the Consultation Support Center. The median age of patients was 48 years old. The most common primary cancer site was the breast in 28 patients followed by the lung in 16 patients, and then gynecologic cancer in 10 patients. The most common cancer treatment was chemotherapy in 53 patients (45.3%), and 12 patients (10.2%) were recurrent patients. Fifty-two patients were in regular employment, 24 were unemployed, 17 were of unknown employment status, 16 were in non-regular employment, and 8 were classified/categorized as other. In terms of working status, 40 were on leave, 35 were working, 15 were seeking work, 8 were unemployed, and 19 were categorized as other. The median number of consultations was 1 (1,11). The content of consultations was the social security system in 44 cases (37.6%) job seeking in 24 cases (20.5%), how to inform the workplace in 14 cases (12%), and workplace environment adjustment in 13 cases (11.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

We conducted a survey on the actual status of employment consultation in a cancer center hospital. The majority of consultations were completed in one session. In terms of the content of consultations, there was a high need for consultations on the social security system and job seeking. Further study is needed on the characteristics of employment consultations according to employment status and other attributes.

eHealth Interventions for Dutch Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using the Triple Aim Lens

Background

Globally, the burden of cancer on population health is growing. Recent trends such as increasing survival rates have resulted in a need to adapt cancer care to ensure a good care experience and manageable expenditures. eHealth is a promising way to increase the quality of cancer care and support patients and survivors.

Objective

The aim of this systematic review was 2-fold. First, we aimed to provide an overview of eHealth interventions and their characteristics for Dutch patients with and survivors of cancer. Second, we aimed to provide an overview of the empirical evidence regarding the impact of eHealth interventions in cancer care on population health, quality of care, and per capita costs (the Triple Aim domains).

Methods

The electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane, and Ovid PsycINFO were searched using 3 key search themes: eHealth interventions, cancer care, and the Netherlands. The identified interventions were classified according to predetermined criteria describing the intervention characteristics (eg, type, function, and target population). Their impact was subsequently examined using the Triple Aim framework.

Results

A total of 38 interventions were identified. Most of these were web portals or web applications functioning to inform and self-manage, and target psychosocial factors or problems. Few interventions have been tailored to age, disease severity, or gender. The results of this study indicate that eHealth interventions could positively affect sleep quality, fatigue, and physical activity of patients with and survivors of cancer. Inconclusive results were found regarding daily functioning and quality of life, psychological complaints, and psychological adjustment to the disease.

Conclusions

eHealth can improve outcomes in the Triple Aim domains, particularly in the population health and quality of care domains. Cancer-related pain and common symptoms of active treatment were not targeted in the included interventions and should receive more attention. Further research is needed to fully understand the impact of eHealth interventions in cancer care on participation, accessibility, and costs. The latter can be examined in economic evaluations by comparing eHealth interventions with care as usual.

Developing mHealth to the Context and Valuation of Injured Patients and Professionals in Hospital Trauma Care: Qualitative and Quantitative Formative Evaluations (Preprint)

Background

Trauma care faces challenges to innovating their services, such as with mobile health (mHealth) app, to improve the quality of care and patients’ health experience. Systematic needs inquiries and collaborations with professional and patient end users are highly recommended to develop and prepare future implementations of such innovations.

Objective

This study aimed to develop a trauma mHealth app for patient information and support in accordance with the Center for eHealth Research and Disease Management road map and describe experiences of unmet information and support needs among injured patients with trauma, barriers to and facilitators of the provision of information and support among trauma care professionals, and drivers of value of an mHealth app in patients with trauma and trauma care professionals.

Methods

Formative evaluations were conducted using quantitative and qualitative methods. Ten semistructured interviews with patients with trauma and a focus group with 4 trauma care professionals were conducted for contextual inquiry and value specification. User requirements and value drivers were applied in prototyping. Furthermore, a complementary quantitative discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted with 109 Dutch trauma surgeons, which enabled triangulation on value specification results. In the DCE, preferences were stated for hypothetical mHealth products with various attributes. Panel data from the DCE were analyzed using conditional and mixed logit models.

Results

Patients disclosed a need for more psychosocial support and easy access to more extensive information on their injury, its consequences, and future prospects. Health care professionals designated workload as an essential issue; a digital solution should not require additional time. The conditional logit model of DCE results suggested that access to patient app data through electronic medical record integration (odds ratio [OR] 3.3, 95% CI 2.55-4.34; P<.001) or a web viewer (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.64-3.31; P<.001) was considered the most important for an mHealth solution by surgeons, followed by the inclusion of periodic self-measurements (OR 2, 95% CI 1.64-2.46; P<.001), the local adjustment of patient information (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.42-2.33; P<.001), local hospital identification (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.31-2.10; P<.001), complication detection (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.21-1.84; P<.001), and the personalization of rehabilitation through artificial intelligence (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.13-1.62; P=.001).

Conclusions

In the context of trauma care, end users have many requirements for an mHealth solution that addresses psychosocial functioning; dependable information; and, possibly, a prediction of how a patient’s recovery trajectory is evolving. A structured development approach provided insights into value drivers and facilitated mHealth prototype enhancement. The findings imply that iterative development should move on from simple and easily implementable mHealth solutions to those that are suitable for broader innovations of care pathways that most—but plausibly not yet all—end users in trauma care will value. This study could inspire the trauma care community.

eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review was to identify studies combining the concepts of eHealth and work participation for sick-listed employees across diagnostic groups in health care and workplace contexts.

INTRODUCTION

There is an increased demand for better health care services and technologies, and eHealth is proposed as a useful tool to improve efficiency and reduce costs. eHealth functions at the intersection of medical informatics, public health, and business, and may be a promising solution for managing the process of return to work among employees on sick leave. Assessment of work outcomes is essential in evaluating the effectiveness of health services, and there is a need to map the research literature on existing eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review considered studies combining two core concepts: eHealth and work participation. It considered studies on eHealth interventions for employees (18 to 65 years of age) on sick leave due to any type of diagnosis or disability, conducted by any stakeholder in workplace or health care contexts and in any country. Empirical data from both quantitative and qualitative studies were included.

METHODS

Published and unpublished studies from January 1, 2008, to August 21, 2020, written in English were included in this review. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, WHO clinical registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov. A three-step search strategy was followed. Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers and undertaken using an extraction tool developed specifically for the scoping review objectives.

RESULTS

This review identified 15 studies eligible for inclusion. Four studies delivered the eHealth intervention by telephone, while 10 interventions were web-based. Of the web-based interventions, five had a blended approach, such as website and email support, or website and social media platforms. One study used an app-based intervention. Only eight studies targeted employees sick-listed due to common sick leave diagnoses, such as common mental disorders and musculoskeletal disorders. The workplace context was the target of the eHealth intervention in seven studies, although the intervention was still delivered by health personnel such as therapists or occupational physicians. Collaboration on individual cases between the health professional, employer, and employee to facilitate work participation seemed to be rare. Four studies reported both a theoretical and an empirical base for the intervention used.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrated that the use of eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation is limited, and there is a need for future studies on the use of eHealth technology for this purpose. Developing eHealth interventions specifically for populations at risk of long-term sick leave, and encouraging collaboration between all relevant stakeholders, may help improve work participation.

The MiLES intervention targeting employers to promote successful return to work of employees with cancer: design of a pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Employers express a need for support to facilitate the return to work (RTW) process of employees with cancer. We have developed the MiLES intervention, an online toolbox targeting employers during the RTW of employees with cancer. To evaluate the MiLES intervention, we propose the design of a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT). The aim of this pilot is to determine whether a future RCT to study the effectiveness of this intervention on successful RTW of employees with cancer is feasible. Secondary aims are to obtain preliminary results on the effectiveness of the intervention and to determine the sample size needed in a future definitive RCT.

METHODS

A pilot RCT with a 6-month follow-up will be conducted. Using medical specialists at Dutch hospitals, we aim to enrol 90 participants diagnosed with cancer (<2 years earlier) aged 18-63 years who are in paid employment with an employer and who are currently sick-listed or partly sick-listed for <1 year. Participants randomised to the intervention group will be asked to inform their employer about the online toolbox supporting employers during the RTW process of employees with cancer. Participants in the control group will receive 'care as usual' from their employer. All measures will be assessed at the level of the employee using questionnaires at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of follow-up. The feasibility of a future RCT will be determined using criteria concerning method-related uncertainties and acceptability of the study protocol. The primary effect measure will be successful RTW (that is, RTW perceived as being successful by the cancer survivor themselves). This effect measure will be used to perform the sample size calculation for a future definitive RCT.

DISCUSSION

The design is proposed to determine the feasibility to study the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention targeting employers on the successful RTW of employees diagnosed with cancer. This pilot RCT can increase the probability of a successful future definitive RCT on the effectiveness of the intervention and potentially obviate the need to carry out an unfeasible and resource-intensive study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register (NTR): NL6758, NTR7627. Registered on 30 October 2018.

Supporting employers to enhance the return to work of cancer survivors: development of a web-based intervention (MiLES intervention)

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to develop an intervention targeting employers, with the aim of enhancing cancer survivors' return to work (RTW).

METHODS

Intervention Mapping was used to combine information gathered from several procedures involving numerous stakeholders, for example, employers, cancer survivors, oncological occupational physicians, and e-health experts.

RESULTS

Employers indicated that they require tailored support during four RTW phases: (1) disclosure, (2) treatment, (3) RTW planning, and (4) actual RTW. The most important employer actions were identified for each RTW phase, for instance, "communicate," "support practically," and "assess work ability," and thereafter formulated as the performance objectives of the intervention. The trans-theoretical model of change was used as a theoretical framework, and several methodologies were employed to induce the desired behavior change, for example modeling, tailoring, and active learning. Subsequently, a web-based intervention with interactive videos, conversation checklists, links to reliable external sources, and succinct, tailored tips and information was developed and adjusted on the basis of pre-tests with different stakeholders.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention was developed with input from employers and all relevant stakeholders in the RTW of cancer survivors. The systematic, step-wise development resulted in a succinct and easily accessible intervention targeting the most important employer actions during all RTW phases. As such, the intervention corresponds with employers' needs and preferences in practice.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

By providing employers with support, the intervention could well be the missing link in efforts to optimize the work participation of cancer survivors.

What Employer Actions Are Considered Most Important for the Return to Work of Employees with Cancer? A Delphi Study Among Employees and Employers

Purpose Employers are important stakeholders in the return to work (RTW) of employees with cancer. However, it is unclear what employer actions are most important to that process. The objective, therefore, was to reach consensus on what employer actions are considered most important for the RTW of employees with cancer, by employers and employees separately. Methods A two-round online Delphi study was conducted with two expert panels: one with 23 employers and one with 29 employees with cancer. The results from each panel were analysed separately. Out of 24 suggested employer actions, participants selected the 10 they considered most important for RTW in each of the following RTW phases: (1) disclosure, (2) treatment, (3) RTW plan, and (4) actual RTW. The consensus threshold was set at ≥ 80% during the second round. Results The employer and employee expert panels both reached consensus on the importance of 'emotional support', 'practical support', 'allow sufficient sick leave', 'plan return to work', 'adjust expectations', 'assess work ability', and 'show appreciation'. Employers also reached consensus on 'communicate' and 'treat normally', and employees on 'handle unpredictability'. All these employer actions were considered to be specific for one to three RTW phases. Conclusions Employers reached consensus on the importance of nine employer actions, employees on eight. Both stakeholder perspectives showed great similarities, but did vary regarding important employer actions during the employee's treatment. We recommend developing interventions targeting the employer, meeting both employer and employee needs in each RTW phase, to enhance RTW support for employees with cancer.

Farm Owners and Workers as Key Informants in User-Centered Occupational Health Prototype Development: A Stakeholder-Engaged Project

BACKGROUND

The cost of workplace injuries and illnesses significantly impacts the overall cost of health care and is a significant annual economic burden in the United States. Many dairy and pork farm owners in the Upper Midwest have expanded operations and taken on the role of manager and employer yet receive little training in injury prevention, farm safety, or workers' compensation programs and processes. Clinicians play a key role in the return to work of injured and ill farmers and farmworkers to their jobs, though little to no formal training is offered by medical schools.

OBJECTIVE

This stakeholder-engaged project aimed to develop a prototype application designed to assist clinicians in returning injured farmworkers to light-duty job assignments with their current employers and to assess farm owners' and managers' attitudes toward and barriers to adopting mobile health tools for themselves or their employees.

METHODS

We conducted 12 semistructured interviews with English-speaking farm owners and farmworkers from the Upper Midwest: 5 English-speaking and Spanish-speaking farmworker focus groups and 8 postproject interviews with farm owners that focused on attitudes and barriers to adoption of the developed software. Interviews and focus groups were audio recorded, and data were analyzed and thematically coded using audio coding.

RESULTS

Interviews and worker focus groups guided an iterative design and development cycle, which informed workflow design, button placement, and output sheets that offer specific light-duty farm work recommendations for the injured worker to discuss with his or her employer.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of a complex prototype intended to impact patient care is a significant undertaking. Reinventing a paper-based process that can eventually integrate with an electronic health record or a private company's human resources system requires substantial stakeholder input from each facet including patients, employers, and clinical care teams. The prototype is available for testing, but further research is needed in the form of clinical trials to assess the effectiveness of the process and the software's impact on patients and employers.

An online randomized controlled trial, with or without problem-solving treatment, for long-term cancer survivors after hematopoietic cell transplantation

PURPOSE

This randomized controlled trial examines the efficacy of INSPIRE, an INternet-based Survivorship Program with Information and REsources, with or without problem-solving treatment (PST) telehealth calls, for survivors after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT).

METHODS

All adult survivors who met eligibility criteria were approached for consent. Participants completed patient-reported outcomes at baseline and 6 months. Those with baseline impaired scores on one or more of the outcomes were randomized to INSPIRE, INSPIRE + PST, or control with delayed INSPIRE access. Outcomes included Cancer and Treatment Distress, Symptom Checklist-90-R Depression, and Fatigue Symptom Inventory. Planned analyses compared arms for mean change in aggregated impaired outcomes and for proportion of participants improved on each outcome.

RESULTS

Of 1306 eligible HCT recipients, 755 (58%) participated, and 344 (45%) had one or more impaired scores at baseline. We found no reduction in aggregated outcomes for either intervention (P > 0.3). In analyses of individual outcomes, participants randomized to INSPIRE + PST were more likely to improve in distress than controls (45 vs. 20%, RR 2.3, CI 1.0, 5.1); those randomized to INSPIRE alone were marginally more likely to improve in distress (40 vs. 20%, RR 2.0, CI 0.9, 4.5).

CONCLUSIONS

The INSPIRE online intervention demonstrated a marginal benefit for distress that improved with the addition of telehealth PST, particularly for those who viewed the website or were age 40 or older.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Online and telehealth programs such as INSPIRE offer opportunities to enhance HCT survivorship outcomes, particularly for mood, though methods would benefit from strategies to improve efficacy.

Cancer@Work - a nurse-led, stepped-care, e-health intervention to enhance the return to work of patients with cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although the importance of work for patients with cancer is nowadays more acknowledged both in the literature as well as in cancer survivorship care, effective interventions targeting the return to work of these patients are still scarce. Therefore, we developed a nurse-led, stepped-care, e-health intervention aimed at enhancing the return to work of patients with cancer. The objective of this study is to describe the content of the intervention and the study design used to evaluate the feasibility and (cost) effectiveness of the intervention.

METHODS

We designed a multi-centre randomised controlled trial with a follow-up of 12 months. Patients who have paid employment at the time of diagnosis, are on sick leave and are between 18-62 years old will be eligible to participate. After patients have signed the informed consent form and filled in the baseline questionnaire, they are randomly allocated to either the nurse-led, stepped-care, e-health intervention called Cancer@Work, or care as usual. The primary outcome is sustainable return to work. Secondary outcomes are sick leave days, work ability, work functioning, quality of life, quality of working life and time from initial sick leave to full return to work without extensive need for recovery. The feasibility of the Cancer@Work intervention and direct and indirect costs will be determined. Outcomes will be assessed by questionnaires at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of follow-up.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study will provide new insights into the feasibility and (cost) effectiveness of Cancer@Work, a nurse-led, stepped-care, e-health intervention for cancer patients aimed at enhancing their return to work. If proven effective, the intention is to implement the Cancer@Work intervention in usual psycho-oncological care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NTR (Netherlands Trial Registry): NTR5190 . Registered on 18 June 2015.