IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0063271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of a Hospital-Based Work Support Intervention for Female Cancer Patients – A Multi-Centre Randomised Controlled Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Sietske J Tamminga
  • Jos H A M Verbeek
  • Monique M E M Bos
  • Guus Fons
  • Jos J E M Kitzen
  • Peter W Plaisier
  • Monique H W Frings-Dresen
  • Angela G E M de Boer

Abstract

Objective: One key aspect of cancer survivorship is return-to-work. Unfortunately, many cancer survivors face problems upon their return-to-work. For that reason, we developed a hospital-based work support intervention aimed at enhancing return-to-work. We studied effectiveness of the intervention compared to usual care for female cancer patients in a multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Methods: Breast and gynaecological cancer patients who were treated with curative intent and had paid work were randomised to the intervention group (n = 65) or control group (n = 68). The intervention involved patient education and support at the hospital and improvement of communication between treating and occupational physicians. In addition, we asked patient's occupational physician to organise a meeting with the patient and the supervisor to make a concrete gradual return-to-work plan. Outcomes at 12 months of follow-up included rate and time until return-to-work (full or partial), quality of life, work ability, work functioning, and lost productivity costs. Time until return-to-work was analyzed with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Results: Return-to-work rates were 86% and 83% (p = 0.6) for the intervention group and control group when excluding 8 patients who died or with a life expectancy of months at follow-up. Median time from initial sick leave to partial return-to-work was 194 days (range 14–435) versus 192 days (range 82–465) (p = 0.90) with a hazard ratio of 1.03 (95% CI 0.64–1.6). Quality of life and work ability improved statistically over time but did not differ statistically between groups. Work functioning and costs did not differ statistically between groups. Conclusion: The intervention was easily implemented into usual psycho-oncological care and showed high return-to-work rates. We failed to show any differences between groups on return-to-work outcomes and quality of life scores. Further research is needed to study which aspects of the intervention are useful and which elements need improvement. Trial Registration: Nederlands Trial Register (NTR) 1658

Suggested Citation

  • Sietske J Tamminga & Jos H A M Verbeek & Monique M E M Bos & Guus Fons & Jos J E M Kitzen & Peter W Plaisier & Monique H W Frings-Dresen & Angela G E M de Boer, 2013. "Effectiveness of a Hospital-Based Work Support Intervention for Female Cancer Patients – A Multi-Centre Randomised Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-9, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0063271
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063271
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063271&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0063271?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0063271. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.