Cancer Rehabilitation-Improving Cancer Survivorship in Singapore

Return to Work in Breast Cancer Patients following an Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation Program in a Community-Based Cancer Rehabilitation Center: A Pilot Study

Despite curative treatment and discharge from acute hospital settings, breast cancer patients often have cancer- and treatment-related morbidity which impairs them from returning to work. Hence, the role of community-based return to work rehabilitation programs is important to help these patients transition back to work. This was a retrospective cohort study involving patients with breast cancer conducted at a community-based cancer rehabilitation center. Patients were involved in an interdisciplinary vocational rehabilitation program involving physiatrists, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and social workers. We recruited 63 patients for this study cohort, with 46 (73.0%) patients ≤ 60 years old. After undergoing the rehabilitation program, there were 37 (58.7%) participants who successfully returned to work. These participants returned to work at either within 6 months (27.0%), 12 months (29.7%) or 24 months (43.2%) after enrollment into the program, with a majority enrolling in white collar jobs. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that significant negative factors for return to work were advanced stage of cancer (p = 0.004), along with clinically significant fatigue, measured on the Brief Fatigue Inventory (p < 0.001). However, perceived work ability (p = 0.020) was found to be a positive factor.

Outcomes of a Multi-Modal Hospital-Associated Home-Based Cancer Prehabilitation Program

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of a "one-stop", multi-modal, hospital-associated-home-based prehabilitation model, helmed by a small core team, on newly diagnosed gastrointestinal and urological cancer patients planned for surgery.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study in a tertiary public hospital, involving all newly diagnosed gastrointestinal and urological cancer patients planned for surgery. The primary outcome measure was the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Other outcomes included physical, psychological and quality-of-life measures, and patient satisfaction surveys, taken at baseline, pre-operatively (post-prehabilitation), and at 3 months post-operatively.

RESULTS

When comparing the baseline to pre-operatively (post-prehabilitation), there was a statistically significant improvement in the 6MWT (21.52 m, p<0.001), 30-Second Sit to Stand test (STS) (1.08 repetitions, p<0.001), Timed Up and Go test (TUG) (0.83 seconds, p=0.014) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (total score 1.77, p<0.001). These were sustained (6MWT: 0.22, p=0.964; STS: 0.08 repetitions, p=0.863; TUG: 0.04 seconds, p=0.939) or further improved (HADS total score 2.06, p=0.003) at 3 months post-operatively. There was also a statistically significant improvement in the EuroQol-5 dimension health score (health-related quality-of-life measure) from baseline to 3 months post-operatively (7.04 points, p=0.001), with more than 90% overall patient satisfaction reported.

CONCLUSION

Prehabilitation applied via our model resulted in significant improvements in functional capacity, psychological and quality-of-life outcomes, sustained at 3 months post-operatively, and is a feasible and effective approach that is well-received by our patients.