Work ability and return-to-work in cancer patients
2008

Work Ability and Return-to-Work in Cancer Patients

Sample size: 195 publication 10 minutes Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): de Boer A G E M, Verbeek J H A M, Spelten E R, Uitterhoeve A L J, Ansink A C, de Reijke T M, Kammeijer M, Sprangers M A G, van Dijk F J H

Primary Institution: Coronel Institute for Occupational Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Hypothesis

The extent to which self-assessed work ability collected during treatment can predict return-to-work in cancer patients is unknown.

Conclusion

Self-assessed work ability is an important factor in the return-to-work process of cancer patients independent of age and clinical factors.

Supporting Evidence

  • Mean current work ability scores improved significantly over time from 4.6 at 6 months to 6.3 and 6.7 at 12 and 18 months, respectively.
  • Patients with haematological cancers and those who received chemotherapy showed the lowest work ability scores.
  • Work ability at 6 months strongly predicted return-to-work at 18 months, after correction for the influence of age and treatment.

Takeaway

This study found that cancer patients' ability to work improves over time, and how they feel about their work ability can help predict if they will return to work.

Methodology

Patients were followed for 18 months, with work ability and return-to-work data collected at 6, 12, and 18 months after the first day of sick leave.

Potential Biases

Potential bias in self-reported work ability and return-to-work outcomes.

Limitations

The study may not generalize to all cancer patients as it focused on those employed at diagnosis and did not include patients who returned to work before the first measurement.

Participant Demographics

Patients were aged 18-58, with a majority diagnosed with breast cancer, cancer of the female genitals, or genitourological cancer.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.001

Confidence Interval

1.27–1.48

Statistical Significance

p<0.001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1038/sj.bjc.6604302

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication