Diane Von Ah1, Susan Storey2, Adele Crouch2. 1. Department of Community and Health Systems, Indiana University School of Nursing, 600 Barnhill Drive, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. dvonah@iu.edu. 2. Department of Community and Health Systems, Indiana University School of Nursing, 600 Barnhill Drive, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study examined the relationship between perceived cognitive function including perceived cognitive impairment (PCI) and perceived cognitive ability (PCA) and work ability, work performance, work productivity, and intention to leave employment in breast cancer survivors (BCS). METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was used in the study. Employed BCS completed questionnaires assessing PCI and PCA (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive-3); emotional work demands (Self-Focused Emotional Labor Scale); and work ability index (WAI), work performance, work productivity (Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ), and intention to turnover. Separate regression models examined the relationship between PCI and PCA and work-related outcomes. RESULTS: Participants were 68 employed female BCS who were on average 52 (SD = 8.6) years old and 5 (SD = 3.8) years post-treatment with majority working full time. PCI was associated with poorer work ability (B = - 0.658), work performance (time-B = 0.647, physical-B = - 0.414, and mental-B = 0.689), and work productivity (B = 0.731), but not intent to leave work. PCA was related to higher levels of work ability (B = 0.472), work performance (time-B = - 0.462 and mental-B = - 0.453), and work productivity (β = - 0.494), but not physical demands or intent to turnover. CONCLUSIONS: Employed BCS with negative perceptions of cognitive function reported poorer work outcomes with the exception of the intent to leave employment. In contrast, positive views of one's cognitive abilities were related to improved ratings of work outcomes again with the exception of intent to leave employment. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Healthcare providers need to assess and address perceived cognitive functioning to promote work-related outcomes in BCS.
PURPOSE: This study examined the relationship between perceived cognitive function including perceived cognitive impairment (PCI) and perceived cognitive ability (PCA) and work ability, work performance, work productivity, and intention to leave employment in breast cancer survivors (BCS). METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was used in the study. Employed BCS completed questionnaires assessing PCI and PCA (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive-3); emotional work demands (Self-Focused Emotional Labor Scale); and work ability index (WAI), work performance, work productivity (Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ), and intention to turnover. Separate regression models examined the relationship between PCI and PCA and work-related outcomes. RESULTS:Participants were 68 employed female BCS who were on average 52 (SD = 8.6) years old and 5 (SD = 3.8) years post-treatment with majority working full time. PCI was associated with poorer work ability (B = - 0.658), work performance (time-B = 0.647, physical-B = - 0.414, and mental-B = 0.689), and work productivity (B = 0.731), but not intent to leave work. PCA was related to higher levels of work ability (B = 0.472), work performance (time-B = - 0.462 and mental-B = - 0.453), and work productivity (β = - 0.494), but not physical demands or intent to turnover. CONCLUSIONS: Employed BCS with negative perceptions of cognitive function reported poorer work outcomes with the exception of the intent to leave employment. In contrast, positive views of one's cognitive abilities were related to improved ratings of work outcomes again with the exception of intent to leave employment. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Healthcare providers need to assess and address perceived cognitive functioning to promote work-related outcomes in BCS.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer survivor; Cognitive impairment; Work ability; Work performance; Work productivity
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: Andy S K Cheng; Yingchun Zeng; Xiangyu Liu; Shaxin Liu; Stella W C Cheng; Cindy T T Kwok; Raymond C K Chung; Jianfei Xie; Michael Feuerstein Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2018-09-18 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Larissa Nekhlyudov; Grace B Campbell; Kathryn H Schmitz; Gabriel A Brooks; Anita J Kumar; Patricia A Ganz; Diane Von Ah Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-09-16 Impact factor: 6.921
Authors: Kete M Klaver; Sanne B Schagen; Jacobien M Kieffer; Allard J van der Beek; Saskia F A Duijts Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-05-18 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Kete M Klaver; Saskia F A Duijts; Chantal A V Geusgens; Maureen J B Aarts; Rudolf W H M Ponds; Allard J van der Beek; Sanne B Schagen Journal: Trials Date: 2020-07-20 Impact factor: 2.279