Pilot implementation of MiLES: a web-based intervention targeted at managers with the aim of enhancing the successful return to work of employees with cancer.

BACKGROUND: 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. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Improving person-centered occupational health care for workers with chronic health conditions: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Person-centered care is needed to effectively support workers with chronic health conditions. Person-centered care aims to provide care tailored to an individual person's preferences, needs and values. To achieve this, a more active, supportive, and coaching role of occupational and insurance physicians is required. In previous research, two training programs and an e-learning training with accompanying tools that can be used in the context of person-centered occupational health care were developed to contribute to this changing role. The aim was to investigate the feasibility of the developed training programs and e-learning training to enhance the active, supportive, and coaching role of occupational and insurance physicians needed for person-centered occupational health care. Information about this is important to facilitate implementation of the tools and training into educational structures and occupational health practice. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted, with N = 29 semi-structured interviews with occupational physicians, insurance physicians, and representatives from occupational educational institutes. The aim was to elicit feasibility factors concerning the implementation, practicality and integration with regard to embedding the training programs and e-learning training in educational structures and the use of the tools and acquired knowledge and skills in occupational health care practice after following the trainings and e-learning training. Deductive analysis was conducted based on pre-selected focus areas for a feasibility study. RESULTS: From an educational perspective, adapting the face-to-face training programs to online versions, good coordination with educational managers and train-the-trainer approaches were mentioned as facilitating factors for successful implementation. Participants underlined the importance of aligning the occupational physicians' and insurance physicians' competences with the educational content and attention for the costs concerning the facilitation of the trainings and e-learning training. From the professional perspective, factors concerning the content of the training and e-learning training, the use of actual cases from practice, as well as follow-up training sessions were reported. Professionals expressed good fit of the acquired skills into their consultation hour in practice. CONCLUSION: The developed training programs, e-learning training and accompanying tools were perceived feasible in terms of implementation, practicality, and integration by occupational physicians, insurance physicians and educational institutes.

Interventions for work participation of unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors: a systematic review.

Background: Supporting unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors in their work participation can have extensive individual and societal benefits. We aimed to identify and summarise interventions for work participation of unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors.Methods: Five databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for quantitative studies on interventions aimed at enhancing work participation of unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors. Work participation refers to participation in the workforce, fulfilling one's work role. Manual and automatic screening (with ASReview software) were performed on titles and abstracts, followed by manual full-text screening. Data were extracted regarding study, patient and intervention characteristics, and work participation outcomes. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 and QUIPS tools.Results: We identified 10,771 articles, of which we included two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of which one feasibility RCT, and three cohort studies. In total, 1862 cancer survivors were included, with predominantly breast cancer. Work participation was mainly measured as time to return to work (RTW) and RTW rate. Interventions included components of coaching (e.g., psychological or rehabilitation), training (e.g., building confidence and managing fatigue) and self-management. Two RCTs with unclear RoB did not show an effect of multicomponent interventions compared to care as usual. One cohort study found a significant effect of a psycho-educational intervention on RTW rates, with moderate RoB. The other two cohort studies, with moderate RoB, reported significant associations between components including job search and placement assistance, and work participation.Discussion: Only few interventions aimed at enhancing work participation of unemployed or work-disabled cancer survivors, have been evaluated. In two cohort studies, promising components for future multicomponent interventions were identified. However, findings suggest that more evidence is necessary on such multicomponent interventions, in which elements explicitly directed at work and including the workplace should be included.

A workers' health surveillance online training programme for occupational physicians.

BACKGROUND: To support occupational physicians (OPs) in the implementation of workers' health surveillance (WHS), a training programme was developed. AIMS: (i) To evaluate the effects of a WHS training programme for OPs on knowledge, self-efficacy and skills to implement WHS. (ii) To evaluate to what extent a WHS training programme is acceptable and feasible for implementation in practice. METHODS: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial with waiting-list control group was used. The WHS training programme consisted of an e-learning and a 4.5-h online training session. OPs completed a knowledge test (0-8), self-efficacy questionnaires on knowledge and skills (6-60), and vignette assignments (0-16) to measure skills. OPs completed the questionnaires, either before and after the WHS training programme (intervention group), or before the training programme (control group) while receiving the training programme after the waiting period. All OPs completed questionnaires about the training's acceptability, and feasibility for implementation in practice. ANCOVA and Poisson regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The self-efficacy score (M = 44.1 versus M = 37.2) (P < 0.001) and skills score (M = 9.6 versus M = 8.3) (P < 0.05) of OPs in the training group (N = 16) were higher than the control group (N = 23). No effect was found on knowledge. Evaluation of acceptability and feasibility showed that 21 (58%) OPs were very satisfied with the training part on initiating WHS, and 29 (85%) would recommend the WHS training programme to colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: This WHS training programme has a positive effect on self-efficacy and skills of OPs to implement WHS, and may be acceptable and feasible to implement in practice.

Identification of actions to be taken by managers to facilitate the return to work of cancer survivors: Consensus between managers and cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Managers are considered to be main stakeholders in the return to work (RTW) of cancer survivors. However, the perspectives of cancer survivors and managers differ on what managerial actions should be taken during the RTW of cancer survivors. This difference might put effective collaboration and successful RTW at risk. Therefore, this study aims to reach consensus among managers and cancer survivors on the managerial actions to be taken during the four different RTW phases of cancer survivors (i.e., Disclosure, Treatment, RTW plan, Actual RTW). METHODS: The Technique for Research of Information by Animation of a Group of Experts (TRIAGE) was implemented with managers and cancer survivors (hereafter referred to as "experts"). An initial list of 24 actions was derived from a previous study. Firstly, for each action, fifteen experts were asked to indicate individually how important this action is per RTW phase (Likert scale from 1 - "Not important at all" to 6 - "Very important"). Consensus was reached when ≥ 80% (i.e., ≥ twelve experts) of the experts rated that action ≥5. Secondly, for each phase of the RTW process, the 15 actions with the highest percentage were discussed with eight experts during the collective consultation, except for the actions that already reached consensus. After discussion, the experts voted whether each action was important ("yes" / "no") and consensus required ≥ 87.5% (i.e., ≥ seven experts) of the experts to consider an action as important. RESULTS: Twenty-five managerial actions were finally retained for at least one of the RTW phases, e.g., Disclosure: "respect privacy" and "radiate a positive attitude", Treatment: "show appreciation" and "allow sufficient sick leave", RTW Plan: "tailor" and "communicate", and Actual RTW: "support practically" and "balance interest". CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors and managers reached consensus on the importance of 25 managerial actions, distributed into each phase of the RTW process. These actions should be considered an interplay of managerial actions by different stakeholders on the part of the employer (e.g., direct supervisor, HR-manager), and should be a responsibility that is shared by these stakeholders. The collective implementation of these actions within the company will help cancer survivors feel fully supported.

Workers' health surveillance targeting mental health: evaluation of a training.

BACKGROUND: Mental health complaints occur frequently among healthcare workers. A workers' health surveillance mental health module (WHS-MH) was found to be effective in improving work functioning of nurses, although not implemented regularly. Therefore, training for occupational physicians and nurses to facilitate the implementation of WHS-MH was developed and evaluated. AIMS: This study was aimed to evaluate the effect of training on knowledge, self-efficacy and motivation to implement WHS-MH, and to evaluate participants' satisfaction with the training. METHODS: Three-hour training was held among 49 occupational physicians and nurses in the Netherlands. Effect on knowledge, self-efficacy and motivation was assessed using knowledge tests and questionnaires before and immediately after the training. Satisfaction with the training was measured using questionnaires after the training. RESULTS: A mean knowledge test score of 5.3 (SD = 1.6) was found before training, which did not significantly increase after training (M = 5.6, SD = 1.8). In total, 43% agreed or strongly agreed to have sufficient skills to implement WHS-MH, which significantly increased to 78% after the training. Furthermore, 87% agreed or strongly agreed to be motivated to initiate WHS, which significantly increased to 94% after the training. The majority of participants were satisfied with the training. CONCLUSIONS: Training may enhance the implementation of the WHS-MH through increasing self-efficacy and motivation. However, no effect on level of knowledge to implement WHS-MH was found.

A randomised feasibility trial of an employer-based intervention for enhancing successful return to work of cancer survivors (MiLES intervention).

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 ).

Determinants for the implementation of person-centered tools for workers with chronic health conditions: a mixed-method study using the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases checklist.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to identify the most important determinants of practice for the implementation of person-centered tools which enhance work participation for patients with chronic health conditions. METHODS: A mixed-method study was conducted consisting of semi-structured interviews, a focus group and a survey. Various stakeholders were involved including (representatives of) workers with chronic health conditions, insurance physicians, occupational physicians, other healthcare professionals, researchers, employers, and policymakers. The semi-structured interviews were performed to identify implementation determinants, followed by a focus group to validate resulting determinants. To conclude, a survey was conducted to select the most important implementation determinants through prioritization by ranking the order of importance. The Tailored Implementation of Chronic Diseases checklist (TICD) was used as concept-driven coding frame for the qualitative analysis of the interviews and focus group. The self-developed survey was based on the domains of the TICD. The survey was analyzed by frequency count of first ranking of determinants per and between domains of the TICD. RESULTS: Various stakeholders participated (N = 27) in the interviews and focus group. The qualitative data retrieved yielded a list of determinants with additional in-depth themes according to the TICD. For the selection of the most important determinants, a survey with 101 respondents was conducted, consisting of occupational physicians, insurance physicians and workers with a chronic health condition. From the seven domains of the TICD, respondents emphasized the importance of taking into account the needs and factors associated with workers with a chronic health condition as this determinant ranked highest. Taking into account the individual needs and wishes of workers was mentioned to enable successful implementation, whereas stress of the workers was indicated to impede implementation. Other important determinants included 'being able to work with the tools' in terms of time and usability or 'cognitions, beliefs and attitudes of occupational and insurance physicians' to be able to use the tools. CONCLUSION: This study identified the most important determinants from the perspective of various stakeholders involved in the implementation of client-centered tools in occupational health for workers with chronic health conditions. Furthermore, by prioritizing the most important determinants, targeted implementation strategies can be developed.

Effectiveness of a Tailored Work-Related Support Intervention for Patients Diagnosed with Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

Purpose The aim of this research was to study the effectiveness on return to work (RTW) of an early tailored work-related support intervention in patients diagnosed with curative gastrointestinal cancer. Methods A multicenter randomized controlled trial was undertaken, in which patients were assigned randomly to the intervention or the control group (usual care). The intervention encompassed three psychosocial work-related support meetings, starting before treatment. Five self-reported questionnaires were sent over twelve months of follow-up. Primary outcome was days until RTW (fulltime or partial) and secondary outcomes included work status, quality of life, work ability, and work limitations. Descriptive analysis, Kaplan-Meier analysis, relative risk ratio and linear mixed models were applied. Results Participants (N = 88) had a mean age of 55 years; 67% were male and the most common cancer type was colon cancer (66%). Of the participants, 42 were randomized to the intervention group. The median time from sick leave until RTW was 233 days (range 187-279 days) for the control group, versus 190 days (range 139-240 days) for the intervention group (log-rank p = 0.37). The RTW rate at twelve months after baseline was 83.3% for the intervention group and 73.5% for the control group. Work limitations did statistically differ between the groups over time (p = 0.01), but quality of life and work ability did not. Conclusion Patients in the intervention group seem to take fewer days to RTW, albeit not to a statistically significant extent.Trial registration Trial NL4920 (NTR5022) (Dutch Trial Register https://www.trialregister.nl ).

The Use and Perceived Usefulness of an Online Toolbox Targeted at Employers (MiLES Intervention) for Enhancing Successful Return to Work of Cancer Survivors.

PURPOSE: The MiLES intervention is a web-based intervention targeted at employers with the objective of enhancing successful return to work (RTW) of cancer survivors. The aim of this study is to gain insight into the employers' use and perceived usefulness of the MiLES intervention. METHODS: Employer representatives (e.g. Human Resource managers and supervisors) were given access to the MiLES intervention, which contains, among others, interactive videos, conversation checklists and tailored tips. After six weeks, an online questionnaire gathered data on employers' use and the perceived usefulness of the intervention. In-depth qualitative data on these topics were gathered during semi-structured interviews, which were analyzed using a content analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-one eligible employers were included. Twenty-two of them filled out the questionnaire and twenty were interviewed. Typically, employers used the intervention 2-3 times, for 26 min per visit. The usefulness of the intervention scored 7.6 out of 10 points, and all employers would recommend it to colleagues. Employers' use decreased when support needs were low and when the intervention did not correspond with their specific situation (e.g. complex reintegration trajectories). Employers perceived the intervention to be supporting and practically oriented. They appreciated the fact that the intervention was web-based and combined visual and textual content. The possibility of consulting specialized services for complex situations would further enhance its usefulness. CONCLUSION: The MiLES intervention provides employers with a useful tool in their daily practice. Its effectiveness for enhancing employers' managerial skills and cancer survivors' successful RTW is subject for further research.

Introduction to special section on: current topics in cancer survivorship and work.

Work is a key contributor to quality of life and an important aspect of cancer survivorship. We call attention to current topics in cancer survivorship and work with 12 articles on cancer survivorship and work in this special section. The focus is on less studied diagnostic groups such as gastrointestinal cancer and prostate cancer, and on long-term effects of cancer diagnosis and treatment on work. Furthermore, studies are included on topics not generally studied including cognitive limitations and pain, the role of the employer on work outcomes among different types of cancer survivors and some countries not typically covered in the existing literature on work and cancer survivorship. We conclude that to improve sustainable work participation in cancer survivors, personalised, tailored interventions should be provided. A prerequisite for this is the identification of groups and individuals at high risk for adverse work outcomes. In order to develop such interventions, research involving new approaches such as matching data registries, participatory approaches and the involvement of many stakeholders and survivors with these different types of cancer diagnoses is necessary. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The goal of sustainable work participation in cancer survivors can be improved by the delivery of a personalised or risk-based tailored intervention. Furthermore, successful work outcomes often involve many stakeholders who should all be included Implications for Cancer Survivors. The goal of sustainable work participation in cancer survivors can be improved by the delivery of a personalised or risk-based tailored intervention. Furthermore, successful work outcomes often involve many stakeholders who should all be included.

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.

Work cessation after cancer diagnosis: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Long-term work maintenance among cancer survivors is important for patients, their families and society. AIMS: To assess the risk of work cessation among workers at baseline in cancer survivors at 2 and 4 years after diagnosis compared with a matched cancer-free control group. METHODS: Baseline measurements for this historical prospective study were drawn from the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics 1995 National Census, followed up until 2011. Patients who died before the end of 2011 were excluded from the study. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for the study outcome were assessed by binary logistic regression analyses, controlled for age, sex, ethnicity, years of education and socioeconomic position. RESULTS: Cancer was associated with not working at 2 years after diagnosis (adjusted OR = 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.59-1.84, P < 0.001), while only mild attenuation was seen at 4 years after diagnosis (adjusted OR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.46-1.68, P < 0.001). Analysis by cancer type revealed that patients diagnosed with central nervous system (adjusted OR = 3.42, 95% CI 2.41-4.86, P < 0.001), renal (adjusted OR = 2.10, 95% CI 1.38-3.16, P < 0.001), breast (adjusted OR = 2.05, 95% CI 1.76-2.38, P < 0.001) and haematologic malignancies (adjusted OR = 2.04, 95% CI 1.59-2.61, P < 0.001) showed the greatest magnitude effect at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: These results emphasize the need for tailored interventions in order to enhance work maintenance, even among patients who are working at baseline and with very long-term survivors.

Two-Year Follow-Up of a Multi-centre Randomized Controlled Trial to Study Effectiveness of a Hospital-Based Work Support Intervention for Cancer Patients.

Purpose Purpose is to: (1) study effectiveness of the hospital-based work support intervention for cancer patients at two years of follow-up compared to usual care and (2) identify which early factors predict time to return-to-work (RTW). Methods In this multi-center randomised controlled trial (RCT), 106 (self-)employed cancer patients were randomized to an intervention group or control group and provided 2 years of follow-up data. The intervention group received patient education and work-related support at the hospital. Primary outcome was RTW (rate and time) and quality of life (SF-36), and secondary outcomes were, work ability (WAI), and work functioning (WLQ). Univariate Cox regression analyses were performed to study which early factors predict time to full RTW. Results Participants were diagnosed with breast (61%), gynaecological cancer (35%), or other type of cancer (4%). RTW rates were 84% and 90% for intervention versus control group. They were high compared to national register-based studies. No differences between groups were found on any of the outcomes. Receiving chemotherapy (HR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.59-3.73 p < 0.001), low level of education (HR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.076-2.52 p = 0.02) and low work ability (HR = 1.09 [95% CI 1.04-1.17] p = 0.02) were associated with longer time to full RTW. Conclusions We found high RTW rates compared to national register-based studies and we found no differences between groups. Future studies should therefore focus on reaching the group at risk, which consist of patients who receive chemotherapy, have a low level of education and have a low work ability at diagnosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry (NTR) (http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1658): NTR1658.

Longitudinal Associations Between Fatigue and Perceived Work Ability in Cancer Survivors.

Purpose To examine the associations between changes of fatigue and changes of perceived work ability in cancer survivors. Furthermore, to examine the effects of physical job demands on these associations. Methods Data from a feasibility study on a multidisciplinary intervention to enhance return to work in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy was used. Fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory) and perceived work ability (first item of the Work Ability Index) were assessed at baseline, and after 6, 12, and 18 months. Change scores (S1, S2, S3) from each assessment to the next were calculated, thus encompassing three separate time periods of 6 months. Regression analyses were used to quantify associations between change of perceived work ability and (model 1) change of general fatigue, and (model 2) change of mental and physical fatigue for each 6-month period separately. For model 2, interaction effects of perceived physical job demands were studied. Results A total of 89 participants were included for analysis, among which 84% with a diagnosis of breast cancer. On average, in model 1, a reduction of five points on general fatigue was associated with an improvement of one point in perceived work ability in all three 6-month periods. Model 2 showed, similarly, that change of physical fatigue (S1 and S2: B = - 0.225; p < .001 and B = - 0.162; p = .012) and change of mental fatigue (S3: B = - 0.177; p = .027) were significantly inversely associated with change of perceived work ability. Interaction effects were not significant. Conclusion The inverse, longitudinal association between fatigue and perceived work ability supports previous findings from cross-sectional studies and shows potential occupational impact of targeting fatigue in cancer rehabilitation.

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.

Higher incidence of screening-related cancers in the employed population.

Background: Employment may confound the risk of a cancer diagnosis in both directions. We hypothesized that a higher baseline rate of employment among cancer patients may explain the lack of association between a cancer diagnosis and later unemployment in many studies. Aims: To assess the unemployment rate among cancer patients before diagnosis compared with a matched cancer-free control group. Methods: Using data from the Israeli National Central Bureau of Statistics 1995 census (persons aged between 15 and 60 years old), the Israeli Tax Authority database and the Israel Cancer Registry, cancer patients (diagnosed between the years 2000 and 2007 and alive at 2011) were compared with matched cancer-free controls. Results: There were 8797 cancer patients and 26166 cancer-free controls. We found that, in general, cancer was not associated with unemployment 2 years before diagnosis (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-1.009, P = NS) after adjustment for age, gender, ethnicity, educational years and residential socioeconomic position. However, the diagnoses associated with screening (breast, prostate, colorectal and cervix cancers) were inversely associated with unemployment 2 years before diagnosis (adjusted OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, P < 0.01). Conclusions: The results from the current study suggest that a higher baseline rate of employment among cancer patients, mainly those who were diagnosed with screening-associated cancers, explains false negative results in previous studies assessing cancer survivors' work issues.

Feasibility of a multidisciplinary intervention to help cancer patients return to work.

This study evaluates feasibility of a multidisciplinary intervention combining occupational counselling with physical exercise to enhance cancer patients' return to work, assesses whether care providers and patients were satisfied with the intervention, and describes barriers to and facilitators of execution. Newly diagnosed cancer patients, treated with chemotherapy and on sick leave from (self-)employment participated. Patients received counselling from an oncological occupational physician (OOP), were assessed by a sports physician, and performed a 12-week training programme supervised by physiotherapists. Care providers completed registration forms to collect data on reach, dose delivered and received in executing the protocol and were interviewed about their satisfaction and barriers to and facilitators of execution. Patients completed three questionnaires on satisfaction and usefulness of the intervention. Fifty-six per cent of all patients were eligible (reach). In total, 123 patients participated. For all intervention components dose delivered exceeded 75%; dose received ranged from 49%-79%. Overall, patients and care providers were satisfied and perceived the intervention as useful. Care providers considered the intervention feasible, while execution was facilitated by highly motivated patients and impeded by physical limitations hindering exercise. It is feasible to conduct this multidisciplinary intervention in cancer patients during curative treatment. Patients and care providers were satisfied with the intervention.

Perceived employer-related barriers and facilitators for work participation of cancer survivors: A systematic review of employers' and survivors' perspectives.

OBJECTIVE: To identify employer-related barriers and facilitators for work participation of cancer survivors from the perspective of both employers and cancer survivors, and to synthesise these perceived barriers and facilitators to understand their perceived consequences. METHODS: A systematic review of qualitative studies focusing on employers' and cancer survivors' perspectives on the work participation of cancer survivors was performed. Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Business Source Premier) were systematically searched, and the quality of studies included was assessed using the CASP checklist. Perceived barriers and facilitators were extracted and synthesised to conduct a content analysis. RESULTS: Five studies representing the employers' perspectives and 47 studies representing the cancer survivors' perspectives were included. Employers perceived barriers and facilitators related to support, communication, RTW policies, knowledge about cancer, balancing interests and roles, and attitude. Survivors perceived barriers and facilitators related to support, communication, work environment, discrimination, and perception of work ability. The synthesis found that the employers' willingness to support can be understood by perceptions they have of the survivor, goals of the employer, and national or organisational policies. Employers require knowledge about cancer and RTW policies to be able to support survivors. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified a plurality of and a large variety in perceived employer-related barriers and facilitators for work participation of cancer survivors, which can be understood to be related to both employers' willingness and ability to support. There is a need for interventions targeting employers, with the aim of enhancing the sustainable work participation of cancer survivors.