Municipal return to work management in cancer survivors: a controlled intervention study.

INTRODUCTION: Resuming work during or after cancer treatment has become an important target in cancer rehabilitation. PURPOSE: The aim was in a controlled trial to study the return to work (RTW) effect of an early, individually tailored vocational rehabilitation intervention targeted to improve readiness for RTW in cancer survivors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Participants diagnosed with breast, cervix, ovary, testicular, colon-rectal, and head-and-neck cancers as well as being employed were allocated to a vocational rehabilitation intervention provided by municipal social workers (n = 83) or to usual municipal RTW management (n = 264). The intervention contained three elements: motivational communication inspired by Acceptance and Commitment Therapy by which RTW barriers were addressed, municipal cancer rehabilitation and finally employer and workplace contact. RTW effect was assessed as relative cumulative incidence proportions (RCIP) in the control and intervention group within 52 weeks of follow-up, estimated from the week where treatment ended at the hospital. RCIP was interpreted and reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for gender, age cancer diagnosis, education, comorbidity, and sick leave weeks. RESULTS: Across cancer diagnoses 69 (83.1%) and 215 (81.4%) returned to work in the intervention and control group, respectively. No statistical effect was seen (RR 1.08 (95% CI 0.98-1.19)). Repeating the analyses solely for participants with breast cancer (n = 290) showed a significant effect of the intervention (RR 1.12 (95% CI 1.01-1.23)). CONCLUSION: More than 80% returned to work in both groups. However, no statistical difference in RTW effect was seen across cancer diagnoses within one year from being exposed to an early, individually tailored vocational rehabilitation intervention compared with usual municipal RTW management. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN50753764.

Associations between work environment, health status and sick leave among pregnant employees.

Aims: To study the associations between and timing of psychosocial and physical work factors and health status on sick leave among Danish pregnant employees. Methods: A total of 910 pregnant women completed a questionnaire in gestational weeks 12 (baseline) and 27 (follow-up). Information about psychosocial and physical work factors and health status was obtained at baseline. Associations with sick leave ⩾14 days were estimated using logistic regression. Further, the impact of timing and duration of exposure on sick leave were examined. Results: A total of 133 women (14.6%) reported ⩾14 days of sick leave at follow-up (27 weeks of gestation). Work-related risk factors for sick leave were high work pace, low influence, low recognition, low job satisfaction, conflict in work-family balance, standing/walking, heavy lifting, and shift work/night shift. Health-related risk factors were burnout, stress, possibility of depression, low work ability, previous sick leave, and poor self-rated health. Being exposed to work-related risk factors during the first 27 weeks of pregnancy or at follow-up increased the risk of sick leave compared with those not exposed at any time or only exposed at baseline. Poor health status increased the risk if women were exposed in the first 27 weeks of pregnancy; however, high possibility of depression was also a risk factor when experienced in early pregnancy. Conclusions: Psychosocial and physical work-related risk factors and poor health status were associated with more sick leave in pregnant employees. Early adjustment of work-related risk factors at the workplace is needed to reduce sick leave.

Educational attainment and work disability in cancer survivors: Do diagnosis and comorbidity affect this association?

OBJECTIVES: To study whether educational attainment had less impact on work disability in cancer survivors than in individuals without cancer. To study whether comorbidity had a higher impact on work disability in low-educated cancer survivors than in high-educated and whether this impact differed when compared with individuals without cancer. METHODS: Linkage of population-based public health survey data and the Danish Cancer Registry formed two groups: cancer survivors (n = 3,514) and cancer-free individuals (n = 171,262). In logistic regression models, the risk of experiencing an 8-week sick leave spell and the granting of disability pension within a 3-year follow-up period was studied in three educational levels and whether these associations were modified by history of cancer and comorbidity. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. RESULTS: Non-stratified adjusted risk of experiencing an 8-week sick leave spell (OR: 1.41, 95% CI (1.33-1.49)) or being granted a disability pension (OR: 1.61, 95% CI (1.31-1.97)) was significantly higher in low-educated than in high-educated respondents. Cancer or comorbidity did not significantly interact with education on the risk of work disability. CONCLUSIONS: A moderate impact of low education on future work disability was found for all respondents, neither history of cancer nor comorbidity modified this association.

Effects of a randomized controlled intervention trial on return to work and health care utilization after long-term sickness absence.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the RCT study was to investigate if the effect of a multidisciplinary intervention on return to work (RTW) and health care utilization differed by participants' self-reported health status at baseline, defined by a) level of somatic symptoms, b) health anxiety and c) self-reported general health. METHODS: A total of 443 individuals were randomized to the intervention (n = 301) or the control group (n = 142) and responded to a questionnaire measuring health status at baseline. Participants were followed in registries measuring RTW and health care utilization. Relative risk (RR) and odds ratio (OR) were used as measures of associations. Results were adjusted for gender, age, educational level, work ability and previous sick leave. RESULTS: Among all responders we found no effect of the intervention on RTW. Among participants with low health anxiety, the one-year probability of RTW was lower in the intervention than in the control group (RR = 0.79 95 % CI 0.68-0.93), but for those with high health anxiety there was no difference between the groups (RR = 1.15 95 % CI 0.84-1.57). Neither general health nor somatic symptoms modified the effect of the intervention on RTW. The intervention had no effect on health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS: The multidisciplinary intervention did not facilitate RTW or decrease health care utilization compared to ordinary case management in subgroups with multiple somatic symptoms, health anxiety or low self-rated health. However, the intervention resulted in a reduced chance of RTW among participants with low health anxiety levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN43004323 , and ISRCTN51445682.

Municipal return to work management in cancer survivors undergoing cancer treatment: a protocol on a controlled intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors are often left on their own to deal with the challenges of resuming work during or after cancer treatment, mainly due to unclear agreements between stakeholders responsible for occupational rehabilitation. Social inequality exists in cancer risk, survival probability and continues with regard to the chance of being able to return to work. The aim is to apply an early, individually tailored occupational rehabilitation intervention to cancer survivors in two municipalities parallel with cancer treatment focusing on enhancing readiness for return to work. METHODS/DESIGN: In a controlled trial municipal job consultants use acceptance and commitment therapy dialogue and individual-placement-and-support-inspired tools with cancer survivors to engage them in behaviour changes toward readiness for return to work. The workplace is involved in the return to work process. Patients referred to surgery, radiotherapy or chemotherapy at the Oncology Department, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark for the diagnoses; breast, colon-rectal, head and neck, thyroid gland, testicular, ovarian or cervix cancer are eligible for the study. Patients must be residents in the municipalities of Silkeborg or Randers, 18-60 years of age and have a permanent or temporary employment (with at least 6 months left of their contract) at inclusion. Patients, for whom the treating physician considers occupational rehabilitation to be unethical, or who are not reading or talking Danish are excluded. The control group has identical inclusion and exclusion criteria except for municipality of residence. Return to work is the primary outcome and is indentified in a social transfer payment register. Effect is assessed as relative cumulative incidences within 52 weeks and will be analysed in generalised linear regression models using the pseudo values method. As a secondary outcome; co-morbidity and socio-economic status is analysed as effect modifiers of the intervention effect on return to work. DISCUSSION: The innovative element of this intervention is the timing of the occupational rehabilitation which is much earlier initiated than usual and the active involvement of the workplace. We anticipate that vulnerable cancer survivors will benefit from this approach and reduce the effects of social inequality on workability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN50753764 . Registered August 21(st), 2014.

Systematic Literature Review on ICF From 2001 to 2013 in the Nordic Countries Focusing on Clinical and Rehabilitation Context.

We present a systematic review on International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) used in the Nordic countries from 2001 through 2013, describing and quantifying the development in utilization of ICF, and describe the extent to which the different components of the ICF have been used. A search was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycInfo. Papers from Nordic countries were included if ICF was mentioned in title or abstract. Papers were assigned to one of eight categories covering the wide rehabilitation area; furthermore, area of focus was assigned. Use of ICF components and intervention were coded in papers categorized as "clinical and/or rehabilitation contexts" or "non-clinical contexts". One hundred seventy papers were included, of these 99 papers were from the categories "clinical and/or rehabilitation contexts" or "non-clinical contexts". Forty-two percent of the 170 included papers were published in the period 2011 - 2013. There was an increase in ICF-relevant papers from 2001 to 2013, especially in the categories "clinical and/or rehabilitation contexts" and "non-clinical contexts". The most represented focus areas were neurology, musculoskeletal, and work-related areas. All five or at least four ICF components were mentioned in the results or discussions in most papers, and activity was most frequently mentioned.