Jennifer E Swanberg1,2,3,4, Helen M Nichols2, Robin C Vanderpool5, Paula Rosenblatt6,4, J Kathleen Tracy3,6,4. 1. Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Professional Studies, Providence College, Providence, Rhode Island. 2. University of Maryland School of Social Work, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 4. University of Maryland Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center. 5. Department of Health, Behavior & Society, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky. 6. Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many cancer survivors face challenges remaining at work during treatment or returning to work posttreatment. Workplace supports can ease the strain associated with managing the cancer-work interface. Limited research has examined the employment experiences of low-wage earning survivors, who are less likely to have access to workplace supports, overlooking a factor that may influence survivors' employment outcomes. AIMS: This study assessed differences in employment experiences between working poor (WP) and working nonpoor (WNP) cancer survivors in the United States. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from the 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) and the 2011 MEPS Experiences with Cancer Survivorship Supplement were analyzed to evaluate differences in workplace supports, cancer-related psychological job distress, productivity, and employment outcomes between WP and WNP cancer survivors. The sample included adults diagnosed with cancer within 5 years prior to survey completion and engaged in paid employment since diagnosis. Working poor respondents had income below 200% of the poverty level. Chi-square tests assessed differences between WP (n = 57) and WNP (n = 164) cancer survivors' demographic, cancer, and employment characteristics; cancer-related psychological job distress; employee productivity; and employment outcome measures. Multiple logistic regression analyses determined the independent association between WP status and these same variables controlling for sociodemographic confounders. Working poor survivors were more likely to take unpaid time off, change from full-time to part-time, to report cancer-related psychological job distress, negative influences on job productivity and employment outcomes, and less likely to have health insurance. In logistic regression analyses, those who took unpaid time off were more likely to be WP; being WP was also associated with poorer employment outcomes, after controlling for sociodemographics differences between WP and WNP. CONCLUSION: Working poor survivors had fewer workplace supports and poorer employment outcomes than WNP survivors, highlighting important occupational disparities for cancer survivors. Areas for future research are discussed.
BACKGROUND: Many cancer survivors face challenges remaining at work during treatment or returning to work posttreatment. Workplace supports can ease the strain associated with managing the cancer-work interface. Limited research has examined the employment experiences of low-wage earning survivors, who are less likely to have access to workplace supports, overlooking a factor that may influence survivors' employment outcomes. AIMS: This study assessed differences in employment experiences between working poor (WP) and working nonpoor (WNP) cancer survivors in the United States. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from the 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) and the 2011 MEPS Experiences with Cancer Survivorship Supplement were analyzed to evaluate differences in workplace supports, cancer-related psychological job distress, productivity, and employment outcomes between WP and WNP cancer survivors. The sample included adults diagnosed with cancer within 5 years prior to survey completion and engaged in paid employment since diagnosis. Working poor respondents had income below 200% of the poverty level. Chi-square tests assessed differences between WP (n = 57) and WNP (n = 164) cancer survivors' demographic, cancer, and employment characteristics; cancer-related psychological job distress; employee productivity; and employment outcome measures. Multiple logistic regression analyses determined the independent association between WP status and these same variables controlling for sociodemographic confounders. Working poor survivors were more likely to take unpaid time off, change from full-time to part-time, to report cancer-related psychological job distress, negative influences on job productivity and employment outcomes, and less likely to have health insurance. In logistic regression analyses, those who took unpaid time off were more likely to be WP; being WP was also associated with poorer employment outcomes, after controlling for sociodemographics differences between WP and WNP. CONCLUSION: Working poor survivors had fewer workplace supports and poorer employment outcomes than WNP survivors, highlighting important occupational disparities for cancer survivors. Areas for future research are discussed.
Authors: Charles S Cleeland; Musa Mayer; Nancy A Dreyer; Yeun Mi Yim; Elaine Yu; Zhaohui Su; Yong Mun; Jeff A Sloan; Peter A Kaufman Journal: Breast Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: Birgit Brusletto; Roy A Nielsen; Harald Engan; Line Oldervoll; Camilla M Ihlebæk; Nina Helen Mjøsund; Steffen Torp Journal: Scand J Public Health Date: 2020-09-04 Impact factor: 3.021
Authors: Caitlin B Biddell; Stephanie B Wheeler; Rebekah S M Angove; Kathleen D Gallagher; Eric Anderson; Erin E Kent; Lisa P Spees Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-07-30 Impact factor: 6.244