11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Return to Work Interventions for Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and a Methodological Critique

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Cancer patients are more at risk of being unemployed or having difficulties to return to work (RTW) compared to individuals without health concerns, and is thus a major public health issue. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and describe the interventions developed specifically to help cancer patients to RTW after treatment. Two researchers independently screened the articles for inclusion and Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) checklists were used to assess the methodology of the included studies. Ten manuscripts met the inclusion criteria. The type of studies were three quasi-experimental studies, three longitudinal studies, three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a qualitative study. RTW interventions were conducted in or outside the hospital ( n = 6 and 3 respectively), or both ( n = 1). Improvements in RTW were only observed in quasi-experimental studies. No improvement in RTW was noted in RCTs, nor in other measures (e.g., quality of life, fatigue). Lack of statistically significant improvement does not necessarily reflect reality, but may be attributed to non-adapted research methods. This systematic review underscores the need for researches in the RTW field to reach a consensus on RTW criteria and their assessment. Recommendations to this effect are suggested.

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          From ideas to efficacy: The ORBIT model for developing behavioral treatments for chronic diseases.

          Given the critical role of behavior in preventing and treating chronic diseases, it is important to accelerate the development of behavioral treatments that can improve chronic disease prevention and outcomes. Findings from basic behavioral and social sciences research hold great promise for addressing behaviorally based clinical health problems, yet there is currently no established pathway for translating fundamental behavioral science discoveries into health-related treatments ready for Phase III efficacy testing. This article provides a systematic framework for developing behavioral treatments for preventing and treating chronic diseases.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Cancer survivors and unemployment: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.

            Nearly half of adult cancer survivors are younger than 65 years, but the association of cancer survivorship with employment status is unknown. To assess the association of cancer survivorship with unemployment compared with healthy controls. A systematic search of studies published between 1966 and June 2008 was conducted using MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and OSH-ROM databases. Eligible studies included adult cancer survivors and a control group, and employment as an outcome. Pooled relative risks were calculated over all studies and according to cancer type. A Bayesian meta-regression analysis was performed to assess associations of unemployment with cancer type, country of origin, average age at diagnosis, and background unemployment rate. Twenty-six articles describing 36 studies met the inclusion criteria. The analyses included 20,366 cancer survivors and 157,603 healthy control participants. Studies included 16 from the United States, 15 from Europe, and 5 from other countries. Overall, cancer survivors were more likely to be unemployed than healthy control participants (33.8% vs 15.2%; pooled relative risk [RR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.55). Unemployment was higher in breast cancer survivors compared with control participants (35.6% vs 31.7%; pooled RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.11-1.49), as well as in survivors of gastrointestinal cancers (48.8% vs 33.4%; pooled RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.02-2.05), and cancers of the female reproductive organs (49.1% vs 38.3%; pooled RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.17-1.40). Unemployment rates were not higher for survivors of blood cancers compared with controls (30.6% vs 23.7%; pooled RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.95-2.09), prostate cancers (39.4% vs 27.1%; pooled RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.00-1.25), or testicular cancer (18.5% vs 18.1%; pooled RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.74-1.20). For survivors in the United States, the unemployment risk was 1.5 times higher compared with survivors in Europe (meta-RR, 1.48; 95% credibility interval, 1.15-1.95). After adjustment for diagnosis, age, and background unemployment rate, this risk disappeared (meta-RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.85-1.83). Cancer survivorship is associated with unemployment.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Quality of life among long-term breast cancer survivors: a systematic review.

              The aim of this study was to review the literature on quality of life among long-term survivors of breast cancer and identify the specific aspects of quality of life that were affected in these survivors. We also describe predictors of quality of life. Published research reports were included if they described the quality of life of breast cancer survivors diagnosed at least five years earlier. The methodological quality of the 10 selected studies, conducted between 1997 and 2004, was high according to a list of predefined criteria. Most studies reported that long-term survivors of breast cancer experienced good overall quality of life. However, almost all studies reported that breast cancer survivors experienced some specific problems (e.g., a thick and painful arm and problems with sexual functioning). The current medical condition, amount of social support and current income level were strong positive predictors of quality of life, and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy emerged as a negative predictor. More research on the specific medical and psychosocial needs of survivors is needed in order to be able to design appropriate intervention studies. If anything, this review shows that focusing on the long-term effects of breast cancer is important when evaluating the full extent of cancer treatment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                14 April 2019
                April 2019
                : 16
                : 8
                : 1343
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institut National du Cancer (INCa), 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France; kristopher.lamore@ 123456gmail.com (K.L.); tdubois@ 123456institutcancer.fr (T.D.); igirard@ 123456institutcancer.fr (I.G.); tbreton@ 123456institutcancer.fr (T.B.)
                [2 ]Laboratory of Psychopathology and Health Processes (EA 4057), Paris Descartes University, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France
                [3 ]Health Sciences/Public Health, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany; ulrike.rothe@ 123456tu-dresden.de (U.R.); ulf.manuwald@ 123456tu-dresden.de (U.M.); soja.nazarov@ 123456tu-dresden.de (S.N.)
                [4 ]Neurologia, Salute Pubblica e Disabilità, FONDAZIONE IRCCS ISTITUTO NEUROLOGICO CARLO BESTA, 20133 Milan, Italy; matilde.leonardi@ 123456istituto-besta.it (M.L.); fabiola.silvaggi@ 123456istituto-besta.it (F.S.); erika.guastafierro@ 123456istituto-besta.it (E.G.); chiara.scaratti@ 123456istituto-besta.it (C.S.)
                [5 ]Health Education and Practices Laboratory (LEPS EA 3412), Paris 13 University-UFR SMBH, 93017 Bobigny, France
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8878-2662
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0552-8923
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3745-632X
                Article
                ijerph-16-01343
                10.3390/ijerph16081343
                6518012
                31014004
                94bf0339-2634-4700-bdf5-54887e8cc7a0
                © 2019 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 15 March 2019
                : 12 April 2019
                Categories
                Review

                Public health
                cancer,intervention,return to work,systematic review,work rehabilitation
                Public health
                cancer, intervention, return to work, systematic review, work rehabilitation

                Comments

                Comment on this article