1
|
Forbes D, Lisy K, Wood C, White V, Evans S, Afshar N, Ristevski E, Sharma A, Changrani K, Jefford M. Factors beyond diagnosis and treatment that are associated with return to work in Australian cancer survivors-A systematic review. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2024; 20:198-209. [PMID: 37357383 DOI: 10.1111/ajco.13973] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2022] [Revised: 05/12/2023] [Accepted: 06/06/2023] [Indexed: 06/27/2023]
Abstract
Return to work (RTW) is a marker of functional recovery for working-age cancer survivors. Identifying factors that impact on RTW in cancer survivors is an essential step to guide further research and interventions to support RTW. This systematic review aimed to identify nontreatment, non-cancer-related variables impacting RTW in Australian cancer survivors. A systematic search was conducted in EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Studies were eligible if they included: (1) adults living post diagnosis of malignancy; (2) quantitative data for nontreatment, non-cancer-related variables impacting RTW; (3) only Australian participants. Included studies were critically appraised, and relevant data extracted and synthesized narratively. Six studies were included in the review, published between 2008 and 2020. Studies were of variable quality and mixed methodologies. One study included malignancies of any type with the remainder focusing on survivors of colorectal cancer (n = 3), oropharyngeal cancer (n = 1), and glioblastoma multiforme (n = 1). Multiple factors were related to RTW in individual studies, including older age, presence of three or more comorbidities, fewer work hours pre-morbidly, lower body mass index, longer than recommended sleep duration, and not having private health insurance; however, there was limited consistency in findings between studies. Other variables examined included: occupation type, household income, healthy lifestyle behaviors, flexibility, and duration of employment with workplace; however, no significant associations with RTW were reported. Further research is required to gather compelling evidence on factors that influence RTW in Australian cancer survivors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle Forbes
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Karolina Lisy
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Colin Wood
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Victoria White
- Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- School of Psychology, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Sue Evans
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Victorian Cancer Registry, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Nina Afshar
- Cancer Epidemiology Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Cancer Health Services Research Unit, Centre for Health Policy, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Eli Ristevski
- Monash Rural Health, Monash University, Warragul, Victoria, Australia
| | - Arun Sharma
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Krisha Changrani
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Michael Jefford
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Changrani K, Chima S, Sharma A, Han GG, Sharma A, McNamara M, Jefford M, Emery J, Druce P. A systematic review of smartphone applications for cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv 2023:10.1007/s11764-023-01435-9. [PMID: 37700151 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-023-01435-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2022] [Accepted: 07/21/2023] [Indexed: 09/14/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Mobile phone applications are positioned to support, educate, and empower cancer survivors during post-treatment care. We undertook a review to assess the utility of such smartphone applications; determine whether their use correlates with improved quality of life and other self-reported outcomes; and understand the feasibility of integrating mobile apps into routine follow-up care. METHODS MEDLINE, EMBASE, Emcare, and PsycINFO databases were searched for studies evaluating apps that addressed at least one of the five Cancer Survivorship Care Quality Framework (CSCQF) domains published up until December 2021. Studies were narratively synthesized. Implementation barriers and facilitators were mapped against the Technology Acceptance Model. RESULTS Twenty-three primary studies were included in this review. Only three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. Studies generally found mobile apps to be feasible, acceptable, and well-placed to support survivorship care. Health promotion was the most predominant CSCQF domain with apps primarily aiming to support exercise and dietary changes. The domains of monitoring for cancer recurrence (n=5) and management of co-morbidities (n=1) were underrepresented. Barriers to app use included greater time since active treatment, lack of familiarity with technology, and content not tailored to the user. CONCLUSIONS Mobile apps are both feasible and acceptable in supporting the transition between active treatment and follow-up care. However, understanding the utility of such apps is limited by the low number of RCTs. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS Mobile apps have the potential to be useful support tools for patients post-treatment. However, given the number of apps developed, targeted, and available to cancer survivors, practical guidance to help cancer survivors choose appropriate apps is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sophie Chima
- Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Arun Sharma
- The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Gil-Gyu Han
- The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Anushka Sharma
- The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Mairead McNamara
- Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Michael Jefford
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
| | - Jon Emery
- Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Paige Druce
- Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|