Search

Abstract Background While many studies investigated changes in working status in cancer survivors, most studies have been performed in survivors of breast cancer and few studies evaluated factors associated with changes in the working status of cancer survivors comprehensively. We aimed to evaluate the changes in the working status of cancer survivors after diagnosis and socio-demographic, clinical, work-related and psychological factors associated with it. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey of adult patients with cancer who were working at the time of diagnosis. A trained interviewer inquired about participants’ current working status, including leave of absence, discontinuing, continuing, and changing work. Sociodemographic, clinical, work-related and psychological factors were measured. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with changes in the working status. Results Among the 730 patients, 29%, 18% and 6% were currently on a discontinued working, leave of absence and had changed jobs, respectively. Patients who discontinued working after cancer diagnosis were more likely to be female, have ≥ $3,000 of monthly family income, not be the principal wage earners for their families and be blue-collar workers. In clinical characteristics, advanced-stage cancer and experienced cancer recurrence was associated with leave of absence and discontinued working. In work-related and psychological factors, stress due to insufficient job control (relative risk ratio [RRR] = 2.26), interpersonal conflict (RRR = 1.86), job insecurity (RRR = 2.63), organizational system (RRR = 3.49), and lack of reward (RRR = 11.76), and less meaning to work were more likely to discontinue working after a cancer diagnosis. Conclusion Occupational health care professionals and other stakeholders need to openly communicate with patients with cancer about potential barriers during the return-to-work trajectory.

BackgroundFear of Cancer Recurrence (FCR) in cancer survivors has been insufficiently addressed despite its imperativeness in cancer journey. Although several studies have investigated healthcare professionals' experience with FCR in cancer survivors, a medical social work perspective has rarely been reflected. This study aimed to explore Korean medical social workers' experience with intervening FCR in cancer survivors.MethodsSnowball sampling recruited 12 experienced medical social workers intervening with cancer survivors at tertiary or university cancer hospitals in South Korea. Individual and focus-group interviews (FGI) were conducted with the medical social workers. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by using an inductive qualitative content analysis.ResultsContent analysis of the interviews extracted the following major themes regarding FCR in cancer survivors. First, when and how FCR among cancer survivors emerged at the early stage of medical social work interventions was identified. Second, how medical social workers dealt with FCR in cancer survivors was illustrated. Third, the responses of cancer survivors to medical social work interventions for FCR were assessed. Finally, the internal and external issues underlying the medical social work interventions for FCR among cancer survivors were revealed and discussed.ConclusionBased on the results, this study suggested the implications on dealing with FCR in cancer survivors in the realm of medial social work profession. Furthermore, it expanded the discussion about FCR in cancer survivors from cancer hospitals to community.

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.