Search

BACKGROUND: A considerable number of cancer survivors face difficulties in returning to work (RTW). More insight is needed on how to support employees shortly after cancer treatment and help them make the transition back to work. OBJECTIVE: To gain an in-depth understanding of how and under what circumstances a Cancer & Work Support (CWS) program, which assists sick-listed employees with cancer in preparing their RTW, works. METHODS: A qualitative design was used, inspired by Grounded Theory and Realist Evaluation components. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with RTW professionals (N = 8) and employees with cancer (N = 14). Interview themes covered experiences with CWS, active elements, and impeding and facilitating factors. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed by multiple researchers for contextual factors, active mechanisms, and the outcomes experienced. RESULTS: Respondents experienced the support as human centered, identifying two characteristics: 'Involvement' ('how' the support was offered), and 'Approach' ('what' was offered). Four themes were perceived as important active elements: 1) open connection and communication, 2) recognition and attention, 3) guiding awareness and reflection, and 4) providing strategies for coping with the situation. Variation in the experiences and RTW outcomes, appeared to be related to the personal, medical and environmental context. CONCLUSION: Both professionals and employees really appreciated the CWS because it contributed to RTW after cancer. This research shows that not only 'what' RTW professionals do, but also 'how' they do it, is important for meaningful RTW support. A good relationship in an open and understanding atmosphere can contribute to the receptiveness (of employees) for cancer support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Psycho-Oncologie is the property of PiscoMed Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

MiLES is a web-based intervention targeted at managers with the aim of enhancing the successful return to work (RTW) of employees with cancer. The purpose of this study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementing MiLES in organizations, from a manager's perspective. MiLES was implemented as a pilot in four organizations for six weeks. Sixteen managers were included, of which fourteen were interviewed regarding their perceived barriers to and facilitators of implementation of MiLES in their organization. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed with content analysis. The managers experienced barriers to and facilitators of implementation related to: (1) implementation responsibilities, (2) the intervention's content, and (3) organizational characteristics. Regarding implementation responsibilities, management board approval and an organizational infrastructure with distinct described implementation responsibilities were perceived as facilitators. Regarding the intervention's content, its accessibility, user-friendliness and completeness were perceived as facilitators. If the content did not meet the manager's specific needs, this was perceived as a barrier. Regarding organizational characteristics, several intangible (e.g., added value of MiLES within different organizations) and tangible (e.g., integration into absenteeism registration) organizational characteristics were perceived as facilitators. The absence of a quiet place to use MiLES was perceived as barrier. Implementation of MiLES in organizations may benefit from an infrastructure within the organization that defines responsibilities regarding intervention delivery to managers of employees with cancer. Such an infrastructure should be aligned to existing organizational structures. As per interviewed managers, MiLES has added value in diverse organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The Core Set for Vocational Rehabilitation (CS-VR) of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) describes the work functioning of individuals in need of VR. We aimed to adapt the CS-VR from the perspective of cancer survivors (CSs) and stakeholders, developing a CS-VR-Onco. Methods: We held five focus groups with 17 CSs who were employed at the time of diagnosis, to discuss their work reintegration experiences. After analyzing the focus group conversations, the CS-VR-Onco was developed. During a group interview, eleven stakeholders explored barriers/facilitations in assessing the work functioning of CSs by using the CS-VR-Onco. We applied the framework method and thematic analysis. Results: For the focus groups, the CS-VR-Onco of 85 categories emerged, and the ICF chapters of Mental functions, Exercise and tolerance functions, Interpersonal interactions and relationships, Major life areas, General tasks and demands, Mobility, Support and relationships, and Attitudes were prioritized. For the group interview, stakeholders' perspectives can be synthetized into two themes: close to the lived experience and usability criteria. Stakeholders confirmed the categories of the CS-VR-Onco, a checklist that should be used through an integrated approach across multiple disciplines. Conclusions: The adapted CS-VR-Onco reflects the CSs' lived experiences of work reintegration and the factors that have influenced this process. The CS-VR-Onco was described as complete and usable through an integrated approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prompt services and work-focused support systems are needed to aid cancer survivors returning to work or finding work. Purpose This knowledge translation and implementation project focused on the knowledge users' experience and need for refinement of three work-focused tools to support return to work and maintain work following cancer through their participation in a hands-on workshop. The tools assessed for their utility are a Job Analysis Tool (JAT), a Return to Work (RTW) tool, and a bilingual Canadian website on Cancer and Work. Methods Four workshops took place in three Canadian cities. Participants included cancer survivors, healthcare professionals, and employer representatives. Following an overview of the website and tools, workshop participants (N = 28) completed qualitative and quantitative satisfaction and usability questionnaires using the System Usability Scale and open-ended questions. Qualitative data was analyzed using content analyses from the think-aloud data and from the four open-ended questions collected during the users' use of the tools and website. Results Overall, most study participants reported high satisfaction with the JAT and RTW tools, the Cancer and work website and the workshop. Good usability scores were reported for the RTW planner (73.65 ± 12.61) and the website (74.83 ± 12.36), and only acceptable usability scores for the JAT (68.53 ± 11.90). Conclusion Overall, the study documented the value of the tools and the website to support the RTW process as assessed by several key knowledge user groups. The JAT is considered a helpful procedure to identify job demands in order to guide job accommodations. Given participants' responses that the tool is useful, the next steps are to implement the recommendations for improvement and knowledge dissemination to increase its uptake and the use of job analysis overall. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Important qualitative findings have accumulated on return to work after cancer from the perspective of various stakeholders. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to critically appraise the evidence produced between 2008–2017 on several key stages of the return to work process against the key stakeholders identified in the articles included. METHODS: A systematic search was done on four databases to identify relevant papers. Papers were selected based on pre-defined selection criteria. A qualitative evidence synthesis was performed on the articles included. RESULTS: A total of 57 articles were included in the analysis. Using the secondary thematic analysis, this study identified three categories of articles relative to the stakeholders included: articles focusing on patients' experience (n = 41); articles dealing with multiple stakeholders, including patients (n = 12); and articles drawing on stakeholders other than patients (n = 4). The analysis also revealed five key stages of the return to work process which follow a sequential order and provide a comprehensive image of the process. CONCLUSIONS: More research is required on how employers view and are able to facilitate the return to work process after cancer. New forms of support must be planned and delivered by health professionals for patients who return on the labour market. The five stages model proposed in this study can help employers and policymakers to plan and deliver tailored legislation and guidance for RTW facilitation. All stakeholders must be further trained to embrace the idea that return to work is a complex process which continues long after the survivor returns to work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: People who experience cancer often face serious and unpleasant challenges in understanding their past, present, and future. They think they have lost their lifetime, agency, and interpersonal relationships, and no longer know their bodies. These experiences can change survivors' perceptions of themselves. Therefore, the present study aimed to develop a deep theoretical understanding of the change of self in cancer survivors. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data. Interviews were conducted with 17 cancer survivors, 2 oncologists, and 2 family members of survivors. In this study, grounded theory methodology was used to explore the process of understanding and experiencing "self" in cancer survivors. Results: The present study generated a model about the change of self, with the main concept called "transitional self-disappear," which is understandable based on the concepts of self-disruption (temporal disruption, highlighted body, interference in the agency, individual-self disruption, over-differentiation, relational self-disruption, and painful emotional experiences), self-reconstruction strategy, and quality of self-coherence, and occurs in the context of the cancer-based socio-cultural experiences and individual-environmental preparedness. Conclusion: This model illuminated the complex paths and roads of the survivors' journey from self-disappear to self reconstruction/re-coherence. A healthier experience of this journey can be facilitated by the transcendence of the "self" conceptualized in the past, and the promotion of specific (cancer-based socio-cultural experiences) and general (individual-environmental preparedness) conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This article examines ways COVID-19 health surveillance and algorithmic decision-making ("ADM") are creating and exacerbating workplace inequalities that impact post-treatment cancer survivors. Cancer survivors' ability to exercise their right to work often is limited by prejudice and health concerns. While cancer survivors can ostensibly elect not to disclose to their employers when they are receiving treatments or if they have a history of treatment, the use of ADM increases the chances that employers will learn of their situation regardless of their preferences. Moreover, absent significant change, inequalities may persist or even expand. Methods: We analyze how COVID-19 health surveillance is creating an unprecedented amount of health data on all people. These data are increasingly collected and used by employers as part of COVID-19 regulatory interventions. Results: The increase in data, combined with the health and economic crisis, means algorithm-driven health inequalities will be experienced by a larger percentage of the population. Post-treatment cancer survivors, as for people with disabilities generally, are at greater risk of experiencing negative outcomes from algorithmic health discrimination. Conclusions: Updated and revised workplace policy and practice requirements, as well as collaboration across impacted groups, are critical in helping to control the inequalities that flow from the interaction between COVID-19, ADM, and the experience of cancer survivorship in the workplace. Implications for Cancer Survivors: The interaction among COVID-19, health surveillance, and ADM increases exposure to algorithmic health discrimination in the workplace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Return to work (RTW) is a major goal to promote cancer survivors' social participation. OBJECTIVE: This study describes the multidisciplinary social-healthcare pathway called UNAMANO, conceived to support RTW in this population. METHODS: UNAMANO was developed by the Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, in partnership with the local branch of the Italian Medical Association, nonprofit associations, vocational training institutions, social cooperatives, a labour union, and a chartered accounting firm. RESULTS: UNAMANO is directed towards employed individuals diagnosed with cancer living in the province of RE. It was developed through four actions: A) training healthcare professionals on work-related occupational rehabilitation; B) dissemination among community and stakeholders; C) recruitment and training of volunteers; D) cancer survivor engagement and provision of a personalized comprehensive intervention. This consists in providing information and either occupational therapy to overcome barriers and facilitate RTW or social support through re-training and tailored job search strategies based on individual risk of job loss. CONCLUSIONS: UNAMANO is the first Italian multidisciplinary social-healthcare pathway supporting RTW of cancer survivors. Addressing a wide area of cancer survivors' needs, it provides personalized intervention to resolve work-related issues. We propose this patient-centred RTW model to promote an easier transition from hospital to community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 ). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The prevalence of the group of workers that had a cancer diagnosis in the past is growing. These workers may still be confronted with late effects of cancer (treatment) possibly affecting their work ability. As little is known about the guidance of this group, the aim of this study was to explore the experiences and ideas of managers and professionals about the guidance of these workers in the case of late effects of cancer (treatment). Given the positive associations with work ability of the job resources autonomy, social support by colleagues and an open organisational culture found in several quantitative studies, these job resources were also discussed. Further ideas about the influences of other factors and points of attention in the guidance of this group of workers were explored.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with managers (n = 11) and professionals (n = 47). Data-collection was from November 2019 to June 2020. The data were coded and analysed using directed content analyses.Results: The late effects of cancer or cancer treatment discussed were physical problems, fatigue, cognitive problems, anxiety for cancer recurrence, and a different view of life. The self-employed have less options for guidance but may struggle with late effects affecting work ability in the same way as the salaried. Late effects may affect work ability and various approaches have been described. Autonomy, social support of colleagues and an open organisational culture were regarded as beneficial. It was indicated that interventions need to be tailor-made and created in dialogue with the worker.Conclusions: Especially with respect to cognitive problems and fatigue, guidance sometimes turned out to be complicated. In general, the importance of psychological safety to be open about late effects that affect work ability was emphasized. Moreover, it is important to take the perspective of the worker as the starting point and explore the possibilities together with the worker. Autonomy is an important factor in general, and a factor that must always be monitored when adjustments in work are considered. There is a lot of experience, but there are still gaps in knowledge and opportunities for more knowledge sharing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose This study examined the impact of task-based and relationship-based social support received in the workplace on cancer survivors' retrospective satisfaction with their return to work experience. Methods Cancer survivors (N = 159), completed an online questionnaire assessing their satisfaction with the return to work experience, overall job satisfaction, contact with employers and co-workers while absent, perceived task-based and relationship-based social support received at the time of returning to work, and the perceived emotional quality of workplace relationships. Results Survivors reported that contact with employers, but not co-workers, while absent from work was associated with a more positive return to work experience. Additionally, greater perceived task-based and relationship-based social support at the time of returning to work were significantly correlated with greater satisfaction with returning to work. Importantly, the impact of task-based and relationship-based social support was fully mediated by the perceived emotional quality of workplace relationships. Job satisfaction independently predicted variance in return to work satisfaction. Conclusions Supporting effective return to work after cancer involves consideration of the workplace social context. Greater resources are needed to help workplaces foster and maintain social connections with employees who are absent from work for cancer treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Return to work (RTW) is important for employees who have survived cancer, yet it is challenging for employers. Small enterprises (< 100 employees) might have limited resources to facilitate RTW of cancer survivors. The purpose of this article is to examine how such employers engage in the support of RTW and to uncover their needs. Methods: Eleven owners and one HR manager representing 12 small enterprises (various sectors) were interviewed regarding their experience with RTW of employees surviving cancer. We conducted a thematic analysis with aspects of Grounded Theory. Results: The characteristics of being a small enterprise (i.e. informal practical arrangements, working as a family, working with limited resources and people) related to four concerns experienced by these employers (concerns about the employer's enterprise; the employee's cancer and recovery; RTW and work adjustments; and about communication). In line with these concerns, employers need information on rights and obligations, RTW arrangements and communication skills during RTW guidance. Conclusions: In small enterprises, employers have generally close relationships with their employees, which means that support is gladly provided when employees are diagnosed with cancer. They do however have limited financial means to facilitate RTW and workplace adjustments. They therefore perceive long-term sickness and RTW as a major financial risk for the company. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Evidence shows that employers play a key role in facilitating the return to work of employees with cancer, yet little is known about the employers' experiences in settings where no policies or regulations are available to guide this process. Against this background, we aimed (1) to understand how employers experience and manage the process of having employees with cancer and (2) to explore their reflections regarding their role in returning to work. Methods Twenty employers from various types of organisations and sectors were interviewed. Inductive thematic analysis was performed using NVivo 11. Results Employers experienced having employees with cancer as a process with three distinct phases reflected in three emerging themes: disclosure of the diagnosis and absence from work; returning to work; post-returning to work. A fourth theme emphasizes the employers' reflections on how they conceive their own role. In the absence of a normative framework for dealing with employees with cancer, employers used commonsensical rules of thumb and immediate solutions based on ad-hoc decisions and were often compelled to innovate. They offered accommodations only if requested by the employee after returning to work. The return to work process was neither planned nor phased. Conclusion Employers need information and guidelines for effectively assisting employees with cancer. Better channels of communication and collaboration with health professionals are essential for more adequate support for the long-term consequences of cancer. A detailed return to work policy is required to tackle the inconsistencies in the support offered and this policy must also rethink how diagnosis disclosure takes place in Romanian organisations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The purpose of this study was to explore how employers and co-workers experience the return to work (RTW) process of employees undergoing cancer treatment. Methods Sixteen semi-structured individual interviews and participant observations at seven workplaces took place, involving seven employers and nine co-workers with different professions. A phenomenological-hermeneutic analytic approach was applied involving coding, identification of themes, and interpretation. Results We identified three employer themes: call for knowledge, Making decisions, and Feeling helpless. Also, three co-worker themes were identified: understanding and sympathy, extra work and burden, and Insecurity about future work tasks. Early initiated RTW, e.g. less work hours and work accommodations, did neither constitute challenges for employers nor co-workers in the beginning of the RTW process. However, when the RTW process was prolonged employers encountered difficulties in finding suitable work tasks, whereas co-workers were burdened by extra work. Conclusions Overall, cancer survivors' RTW process was welcomed and encouraged at the workplace level. However, employer and co-worker experiences suggested that RTW initiation parallel with cancer treatment raised challenges at the workplace level, when the RTW process was extended beyond the initial RTW plan; increased workload and difficulties in balancing the needs of the cancer survivor and co-workers. Mechanisms that support cancer survivors' RTW without introducing strain on co-workers should be investigated in future research. Furthermore, support for employers in their RTW management responsibilities needs to be addressed in general and in particular in future RTW interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Return to work (RTW) of cancer survivors (CSs) fluctuates in different contexts. This systematic review searched for recent data on the RTW rate of CSs in Europe, investigating associated factors.Methods: Bibliographic search covered the period from January 2010 to February 2018, with no language restrictions. European population-based studies assessing RTW rate after cancer diagnosis were included. We excluded studies focusing on a specific cancer diagnosis.Results: Twelve observational studies were selected. The cohorts investigated included 280 to 46,720 individuals from Northwestern and Central Europe diagnosed with cancer from 1987 to 2010. The median interval between diagnosis and documented RTW was 2 years (0.2-23.4 years). RTW rates of CSs ranged from 39 to 77%. RTW of individuals employed at the time of diagnosis ranged from 60 to 92%, the latter registered in a sample with good prognosis. Personal factors, work-related factors, and cancer-related factors were all associated with RTW. Healthcare team interventions facilitated reintegration to work.Conclusions: Data from Mediterranean and Central European countries are urgently needed to understand whether RTW is an issue for CSs there as well and whether socio-rehabilitative interventions are required to mitigate the potential negative impact of cancer on individuals and society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]