Comparison of focus groups on cancer and employment conducted face to face or by telephone.

Findings from telephone focus groups have not been compared previously to findings from face-to-face focus groups. We conducted four telephone focus groups and five face-to-face focus groups in which a single moderator used the same open-ended questions and discussion facilitation techniques. This comparison was part of a larger study to gain a better understanding of employment experiences after diagnosis of gynecologic cancer. Offering the telephone option made it easier to recruit women from rural areas and geographically distant cities. Interaction between participants occurred in both types of focus group. Content analysis revealed that similar elements of the employment experience after cancer diagnosis were described by telephone and face-to-face participants. Participants disclosed certain emotionally sensitive experiences only in the telephone focus groups. Telephone focus groups provide useful data and can reduce logistical barriers to research participation. Visual anonymity might help some participants feel more comfortable discussing certain personal issues.

Employment and quality of survivorship among women with cancer: domains not captured by quality of life instruments.

BACKGROUND: Many quality of life instruments assess the amount of paid work in combination with role function at home in the same items and do not specifically assess social support in the workplace. The goal of this study was to obtain women's views on the relationship between employment and health-related quality of life. METHODS: A focus group and questionnaire study was conducted among 73 women with gynecologic cancer who were employed at diagnosis and 25 people who provided them with psychosocial support. RESULTS: The women held a variety of blue collar and white collar jobs at diagnosis. Employment provided a strong sense of accomplishment and a welcome distraction during treatment. The employment experience was described as distinct from role function at home. No one equated working more hours with better quality of life. Social support at work could be poor at the same time that support from family and friends grew stronger. CONCLUSIONS: The contribution to their quality of life that cancer survivors feel they receive from employment may not be linearly related to the quantity of their role function in the workplace. Employment-related items could be useful as an adjunct to standard quality of life measures.

Cancer-related tasks involving employment: opportunities for clinical assistance.

Many cancer survivors experience unmet psychosocial needs related to their jobs, and women often fare worse than men in this regard. However, little research exists on ways to assist patients with cancer in preventing or managing common job problems. We conducted focus groups and a survey among 73 women who were employed at the time of presentation of a gynecologic cancer. We compared the findings with existing recommendations and professional standards for occupational rehabilitation. Participants described different cancer-related employment tasks in three time periods: just after diagnosis, during primary treatment, and after primary treatment is completed. The more difficult tasks included communicating with supervisors and coworkers, determining company policies, applying for employer-sponsored benefits, handling finances, managing symptoms on returning to work, finding effective solutions to cancer-related job problems, leaving the job with dignity if too sick or if the job ended, and making career plans. The cancer care team may be able to help meet the psychosocial needs of employed cancer survivors by screening for job concerns, providing information, formulating a return-to-work plan, treating symptoms, consulting with professionals who have employment-related expertise, and giving other forms of assistance.