| Literature DB >> 22786950 |
Iris F Groeneveld1, Angela G E M de Boer, Monique H W Frings-Dresen.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Returning to work can be problematic for cancer survivors due to suboptimal workplace support, a heavy workload, decreased physical functioning and fatigue. The timely and permanent return to work (RtW) of cancer patients favourably influences quality of life and economic independence. Multidisciplinary interventions aimed at timely and enduring RtW are lacking. The objectives of this article are (1) to describe the protocol of an intervention aimed at RtW of cancer patients, comprising of counselling by an oncological occupational physician and supervised physical exercise in a clinical setting during treatment and (2) to present the design of the study aimed at evaluating the feasibility of this intervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The intervention comprises three counselling sessions with an oncological occupational physician and a 12-week moderate-to-high intensity physical exercise programme, starting at the onset of chemotherapy. The intervention is aimed at cancer patients treated with curative intent, aged 18-60 years, employed and on sick leave. It will take place in two large medical centres in the Netherlands. The feasibility of the intervention will be evaluated as follows: the number of sessions, topics discussed and exercises executed will be registered by care providers; patients' and care providers' opinions will be assessed by questionnaires and interviews, respectively; and the proportion of invited patients that participated will be calculated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study results will be used for optimising the intervention content and may serve as a foundation for future implementation. The Medical Ethics Committees of the Academic Medical Center and the participating medical centres approved the study protocol.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22786950 PMCID: PMC3400074 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001321
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Timing of activities in the intervention.
Counselling session numbers and topics to be discussed during counselling with the oncological occupational physician
| Topic | Session number | Content |
| A | 1 | Discuss diagnosis, treatment and prognosis |
| B | 1 | Discuss job type, company and current work status |
| C | 1 | Explain Dutch laws on sickness absence and social security |
| D | 1 | Advise the patient to keep in touch with colleagues and employer |
| E | 1, 2, 3 | Discuss the patient's overall physical and mental health |
| F | 1, 2, 3 | Discuss the patient's opinions on his perceived physical and mental work ability and his perceived possibilities to and barriers for RtW |
| G | 1, 2, 3 | Discuss the patient's attitude towards RtW and self-efficacy regarding RtW and means to improve these determinants. Assist in setting short- and long-term goals |
| H | 1, 2, (3) | Check the results of the sports medical assessment to support estimation of the patient's physical work ability |
| I | 1, 2, 3 | Using topics A, B, E, F, G and H estimate a patient's physical and mental work ability and possibilities for and barriers to RtW |
| J | (1), 2, 3 | Provide advice on gradual resumption of work and relevant necessary adjustments in working hours, tasks and responsibilities and recommend discussing this advice with the supervisor and the company's OP |
| K | (1), 2, 3 | If a return to the former job is impossible: advise the patient on reintegration to another job |
OP, occupational physician; RtW, return to work.
The content of two evaluation questionnaires aimed at determining the patient's opinion on the intervention
| Outcome variable | Measurement |
| Questionnaire 1: after the first counselling and exercise session | |
| Opinion on the timing of the sports medical assessment, intake to the study and first counselling and exercise session | Too early–too late (3-point scale) |
| Opinion on the content of the first counselling and exercise session | Very pleasant–very unpleasant (4-point scale) |
| Questionnaire 2: upon completion of the intervention | |
| Opinion on the content of the counselling and exercise sessions | Very pleasant–very unpleasant (4-point scale) |
| Opinion on the duration of the intervention as a whole | Too short–too long (3-point scale) |
| Opinion on the overall competence of the OOP and physiotherapist | Report mark (10-point scale) |
| Perceived competence of the OOP with regard to various counselling strategies, for example, listening well, providing useful information, adequately answering questions | Highly disagree–highly agree (5-point scale) |
| Perceived usefulness of counselling components, for example, discussing possibilities for and barriers to RtW | Very useful–not useful (3-point scale)/not applicable |
| Most and least useful components of the counselling and exercise sessions | Open question |
| Perceived interference between medical treatment and counselling and/or exercise sessions | Yes/no |
| Main reasons for not attending or not finishing counselling and exercise sessions | Open question |
| Fulfilment of expectations regarding intervention as a whole | Yes–partly–no |
| Causes of unfulfilled expectations regarding intervention as a whole | Open question |
| Suggestions for improvements of the counselling and exercise sessions | Open question |
RtW, return to work; OOP, oncological occupational physician.