Yuanlu Sun1, Cheryl L Shigaki2, Jane M Armer3. 1. Sinclair School of Nursing, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. ys4k9@mail.missouri.edu. 2. Health Psychology, Harry S. Truman Memorial Veterans' Hospital, Columbia, MO, USA. 3. Sinclair School of Nursing, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. Armer@missouri.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Breast cancer survivors in their employment years are likely to try to go back to work after the primary treatment. Because the literature on return to work among breast cancer survivors is limited, we have undertaken a review of the literature to summarize what is known, including identifying important contributing variables and outcomes. This knowledge may be used to develop hypotheses and potential interventions to support breast cancer survivors who wish to return to work. METHOD: We searched the following databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, SCOUP, and PUBMED, within a 10-year timeframe (2004 to 2014). RESULTS: The majority of reviewed articles (N = 25) focused on three outcomes: return-to-work period, work ability, and work performance. The most frequently studied independent variables were collapsed into the following groups: health and well-being, symptoms and functioning, work demands and work environment, individual characteristics, and societal and cultural factors. Gaps in the literature include evidence of effective interventions to support return to work among breast cancer survivors and research to better understand the roles of government and business-related policy. CONCLUSION: All the studies reported a reduced work engagement and work ability. Employment status and work performance is associated with a combination of individual factors, work environment, culture, and resources. IMPLICATIONS: Significant gaps are apparent in the literature addressing breast cancer survivorship and return to work. This is a complex problem and it will likely require interdisciplinary research teams to develop effective and feasible interventions for this population.
PURPOSE:Breast cancer survivors in their employment years are likely to try to go back to work after the primary treatment. Because the literature on return to work among breast cancer survivors is limited, we have undertaken a review of the literature to summarize what is known, including identifying important contributing variables and outcomes. This knowledge may be used to develop hypotheses and potential interventions to support breast cancer survivors who wish to return to work. METHOD: We searched the following databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, SCOUP, and PUBMED, within a 10-year timeframe (2004 to 2014). RESULTS: The majority of reviewed articles (N = 25) focused on three outcomes: return-to-work period, work ability, and work performance. The most frequently studied independent variables were collapsed into the following groups: health and well-being, symptoms and functioning, work demands and work environment, individual characteristics, and societal and cultural factors. Gaps in the literature include evidence of effective interventions to support return to work among breast cancer survivors and research to better understand the roles of government and business-related policy. CONCLUSION: All the studies reported a reduced work engagement and work ability. Employment status and work performance is associated with a combination of individual factors, work environment, culture, and resources. IMPLICATIONS: Significant gaps are apparent in the literature addressing breast cancer survivorship and return to work. This is a complex problem and it will likely require interdisciplinary research teams to develop effective and feasible interventions for this population.
Authors: Elizabeth Quinlan; Roanne Thomas-MacLean; Tom Hack; Winkle Kwan; Baukje Miedema; Sue Tatemichi; Anna Towers; Andrea Tilley Journal: Work Date: 2009
Authors: Michael Feuerstein; Briana L Todd; Michal C Moskowitz; Gina L Bruns; Mallori R Stoler; Thomas Nassif; Xinhua Yu Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2010-10-14 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Ronald M Kline; Neeraj K Arora; Cathy J Bradley; Eden R Brauer; Darci L Graves; Natasha Buchanan Lunsford; Mary S McCabe; Shelley Fuld Nasso; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Julia H Rowland; Rebekkah M Schear; Patricia A Ganz Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jennifer M Hulett; Brick Johnstone; Jane M Armer; Chelsea Deroche; Rami Millspaugh; Joshua Millspaugh Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Li Wang; Brian Y Hong; Sean A Kennedy; Yaping Chang; Chris J Hong; Samantha Craigie; Henry Y Kwon; Beatriz Romerosa; Rachel J Couban; Susan Reid; James S Khan; Michael McGillion; Victoria Blinder; Jason W Busse Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-05-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Shana E Harrington; Nicole L Stout; Elizabeth Hile; Mary Insana Fisher; Melissa Eden; Victoria Marchese; Lucinda A Pfalzer Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2020-03-10