Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Validation of the Return-to-Work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale for Women on Sick Leave Due to Breast Cancer (ROSES-BC)

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer among women. Approximately 40% of BC survivors are diagnosed during the peak years of their professional career. Women face numerous obstacles when returning to work (RTW) after BC. Their decision-making process and self-efficacy to overcome these barriers may undergo alterations. The objective of this study was to validate the Return-to-work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale (ROSES) for BC survivors, with a focus on three psychometric properties: construct validity, test–retest reliability, and predictive validity.

Methods

This prospective study consists of three phases: Phase 1 (baseline, during sick leave) was conducted to evaluate construct validity, Phase 2 (2 weeks later) assessed test–retest reliability, and Phase 3 (6-month follow-up, RTW or not) aimed to evaluate predictive validity. A total of 153 BC survivors participated in Phase 1 of the study, where they completed the 10 dimensions of the ROSES (e.g., fear of relapse, cognitive difficulties). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), Pearson correlations, and Cox regressions were performed, with respect to each phase.

Results

The mean duration for RTW with the same employer was 62.7 weeks. CFAs confirmed the ROSES structure, which had previously been established for other health conditions, showing satisfactory coefficients. Significant Pearson correlation coefficients were observed between the ROSES dimensions from Phase 1 to Phase 2, ranging from 0.66 to 0.88. When considering various confounding variables, chemotherapy treatment and cognitive difficulties (ROSES dimension) emerged as the only significant predictors of RTW.

Conclusion

These findings support the utilization of the ROSES in clinical and research settings for BC survivors to improve their successful RTW. After an initial screening using the ROSES, occupational health professionals can further conduct a focused and thorough evaluation of specific dimensions, such as cognitive difficulties. Additional research and information are required to assist BC survivors in dealing with cognitive impairments induced by chemotherapy when they return to work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Please contact author for data requests.

References

  1. Canadian Cancer Statistics Advisory Committee in collaboration with the Canadian Cancer Society, Statistics Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2021. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2021.

  2. Butow P, Laidsaar-Powell R, Konings S, Lim CYS, Koczwara B. Return to work after a cancer diagnosis: a meta-review of reviews and a meta-synthesis of recent qualitative studies. J Cancer Surviv. 2020;14:114–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-019-00828-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Islam T, Dahlui M, Majid HA, Nahar AM, Mohd Taib NA, Su TT. Factors associated with return to work of breast cancer survivors: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-S3-S8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Tan FSI, Shorey S. Experiences of women with breast cancer while working or returning to work: a qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis. Support Care Cancer. 2022;30:2971–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06615-w.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bijker R, Duijts SFA, Smith SN, de Wildt-Liesveld R, Anema JR, Regeer BJ. Functional impairments and work-related outcomes in breast cancer survivors: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28:429–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9736-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cocchiara RA, Sciarra I, D’Egidio V, Sestili C, Mancino M, Backhaus I, Mannocci A, De Luca A, Frusone F, Di Bella O, Di Murro F, Palmeri V, Lia L, Paradiso G, Aceti V, Libia A, Monti M, La Torre G. Returning to work after breast cancer: a systematic review of reviews. Work Read Mass. 2018;61:463–76. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-182810.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hou W, Li Q, Liu X, Zeng Y, Cheng ASK. Exploring the employment readiness and return to work status of breast cancer patients and related factors. Int J Nurs Sci. 2021;8:426–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2021.09.001.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. n der Lee M, Ranchor AV, Garssen B, Sanderman R, Schroevers MJ, Roelen C. Predictors of returning to work after receiving specialized psycho-oncological care. Health Psychol Bull. 2020;4:1. https://doi.org/10.5334/hpb.4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Feuerstein M, Todd BL, Moskowitz MC, Bruns GL, Stoler MR, Nassif T, Yu X. Work in cancer survivors: a model for practice and research. J Cancer Surviv. 2010;4:415–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-010-0154-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Heuser C, Halbach S, Kowalski C, Enders A, Pfaff H, Ernstmann N. Sociodemographic and disease-related determinants of return to work among women with breast cancer: a German longitudinal cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18:1000. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3768-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Tamminga SJ, de Boer AGEM, Verbeek JHAM, Frings-Dresen MHW. Breast cancer survivors’ views of factors that influence the return-to-work process–a qualitative study. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2012;38:144–54. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3199.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. van Maarschalkerweerd PEA, Schaapveld M, Paalman CH, Aaronson NK, Duijts SFA. Changes in employment status, barriers to, and facilitators of (return to) work in breast cancer survivors 5–10 years after diagnosis. Disabil Rehabil. 2020;42:3052–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2019.1583779.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wennman-Larsen A, Svärd V, Alexanderson K, Friberg E. Factors of decisive importance for being in work or not during two years after breast cancer surgery: content analysis of 462 women’s open answers. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21:332. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-021-01468-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Colombino ICF, Sarri AJ, Castro IQ, Paiva CE, da Costa Vieira RA. Factors associated with return to work in breast cancer survivors treated at the public cancer hospital in Brazil. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:4445–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-05164-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Porro B, Michel A, Zinzindohoue C, Bertrand P, Monrigal E, Trentini F, Baussard L, Cousson-Gelie F. Quality of life, fatigue and changes therein as predictors of return to work during breast cancer treatment. Scand J Caring Sci. 2019;33:467–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12646.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Von Ah D, Storey S, Tallman E, Nielsen A, Johns S, Pressler S. Cancer, cognitive impairment, and work-related outcomes: an integrative review. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2016;43:602–16. https://doi.org/10.1188/16.ONF.602-616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnsson A, Fornander T, Rutqvist L-E, Olsson M. Work status and life changes in the first year after breast cancer diagnosis. WORK- J Prev Assess Rehabil. 2011;38:337–46. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2011-1137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Corbière M, Mercier C, Lesage A. Perceptions of barriers to employment, coping efficacy, and career search efficacy in people with mental illness. J Career Assess. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072704267738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gushue GV, Clarke CP, Pantzer KM, Scanlan KRL. Self-efficacy, perceptions of barriers, vocational identity, and the career exploration behavior of Latino/a high school students. Career Dev Q. 2006;54:307–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2006.tb00196.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gragnano A, Negrini A, Miglioretti M, Corbière M. Common psychosocial factors predicting return to work after common mental disorders, cardiovascular diseases, and cancers: a review of reviews supporting a cross-disease approach. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28:215–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9714-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nigatu YT, Liu Y, Uppal M, McKinney S, Gillis K, Rao S, Wang JL. Prognostic factors for return to work of employees with common mental disorders: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017;52:1205–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-017-1402-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Etuknwa A, Daniels K, Eib C. Sustainable return to work: a systematic review focusing on personal and social factors. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29:679–700. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-019-09832-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lagerveld SE, Blonk RWB, Brenninkmeijer V, Schaufeli WB. Return to work among employees with mental health problems: development and validation of a self-efficacy questionnaire. Work Stress. 2010;24:359–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2010.532644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ottati A, Feuerstein M. Brief self-report measure of work-related cognitive limitations in breast cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv Res Pract. 2013;7:262–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-013-0275-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cheng ASK, Lee S, Li N, Tsang S, Zeng Y. Chinese translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the return-to-work self-efficacy scale among Chinese female breast cancer survivors. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20:4225. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054225.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Albert KA, Luzzo DA. The role of perceived barriers in career development: a social cognitive perspective. J Couns Dev. 1999;77:431–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1999.tb02470.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Luzzo DA, McWhirter EH. Sex and ethnic differences in the perception of educational and career-related barriers and levels of coping efficacy. J Couns Dev. 2001;79:61–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2001.tb01944.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Corbière M, Negrini A, Durand M-J, St-Arnaud L, Briand C, Fassier J-B, Loisel P, Lachance J-P. Development of the return-to-work obstacles and self-efficacy scale (ROSES) and validation with workers suffering from a common mental disorder or musculoskeletal disorder. J Occup Rehabil. 2017;27:329–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-016-9661-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Corbière M, Fraccaroli F (2020) The design, validation, translation, and transcultural adaptation of measurement tools: examples in mental health and work (La conception, la validation, la traduction et l’adaptation transculturelle d’outils de mesure: des exemples en santé mentale et travail). In: Corbière M, Larivière N (eds) Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods: In research in human, social, and health sciences (Méthodes qualitatives, quantitatives et mixtes : Dans la recherche en sciences humaines, sociales et de la santé), 2nd edition. Presses de l’Université du Québec (PUQ), Québec, p 880.

  31. Porro B, Durand M-J, Petit A, Bertin M, Roquelaure Y. Return to work of breast cancer survivors: toward an integrative and transactional conceptual model. J Cancer Surviv. 2022;16:590–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-021-01053-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gragnano A, Corbière M, Picco E, Negrini A, Savioli G, Conti M, Corsiglia L, Miglioretti M. Adaptation and validation of the cardiovascular version of the return-to-work obstacles and self-efficacy scale (ROSES-CVD) to the Italian context. Disabil Rehabil. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2022.2123962.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Loisel P, Durand M-J, Berthelette D, Vézina N, Baril R, Gagnon D, Larivière C, Tremblay C. Disability prevention. Dis Manag Health Outcomes. 2001;9:351–60. https://doi.org/10.2165/00115677-200109070-00001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Loisel P, Anema J. Handbook of work disability - prevention and management. 1st ed. New-York: Springer; 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. Corbière M, Negrini A, Durand M, St-Arnaud L, Briand C, Fassier JB, Loisel P, Lachance J-P (2016) Validation of the Return-to-Work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale (ROSES) with Workers Suffering from a Common Mental Disorder or Musculoskeletal Disorder (Validation du questionnaire Obstacles au Retour au Travail Et Sentiment d’Efficacité pour les Surmonter (ORTESES) auprès de travailleurs avec un trouble musculosquelettique ou un trouble mental transitoire). English Research Report R-982 (in French R-938), IRSST, Montréal (Québec). https://www.irsst.qc.ca/publications-et-outils/publication/i/100897/n/validation-questionnaire-orteses

  36. Mokkink LB, Prinsen CA, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC, Terwee CB. (2019) COSMIN study design checklist for patient-reported outcome measurement instruments. In: COSMIN. www.cosmin.nl.

  37. Bentler PM. Equation 6 structural equations program manual. California: Multivariate software Encino; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Byrne BM. A primer of LISREL: Basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1989.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Hofmann R. Establishing factor validity using variable reduction in confirmatory factor analysis. Educ Psychol Meas. 1995;55:572–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. (1993) LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Sci softw int. Printed in the USA

  41. Mueller RO. General structural equation modeling. In: Mueller RO, editor. Basic principles of structural equation modeling: an introduction to LISREL and EQS. New York: Springer; 1996. p. 129–78.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  43. Corbière M, Negrini A, Durand MJ, St-Arnaud L, Briand C, Fassier JB, Loisel P, Lachance J-P. Validation of the return-to-work obstacles and self-efficacy scale (ROSES) with workers suffering from a common mental disorder or musculoskeletal disorder. IRSST; 2017. Montréal (Québec).

  44. NCCN (2023) Practice guidelines in oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) - breast cancer, Version 3.

  45. Tamminga SJ, Braspenning AM, Haste A, Sharp L, Frings-Dresen MHW, de Boer AGEM. Barriers to and facilitators of implementing programs for return to work (rtw) of cancer survivors in four european countries: a qualitative study. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29:550–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9818-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Greidanus MA, Tamminga SJ, de Rijk AE, Frings-Dresen MHW, de Boer AGEM. What employer actions are considered most important for the return to work of employees with cancer? A Delphi study among employees and employers. J Occup Rehabil  2019;29:406–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Armaou M, Schumacher L, Grunfeld EA. Cancer survivors’ social context in the return to work process: narrative accounts of social support and social comparison information. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28:504–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9735-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wang L, Hong BY, Kennedy SA, Chang Y, Hong CJ, Craigie S, Kwon HY, Romerosa B, Couban RJ, Reid S, Khan JS, McGillion M, Blinder V, Busse JW. Predictors of unemployment after breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2018;36:1868–79. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.77.3663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Paalman CH, van Leeuwen FE, Aaronson NK, de Boer AGEM, Oldenburg HSA, Schaapveld M. Employment and social benefits up to 10 years after breast cancer diagnosis: a population-based study. Br J Cancer. 2016;114:81–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.431.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Munir F, Burrows J, Yarker J, Kalawsky K, Bains M. Women’s perceptions of chemotherapy-induced cognitive side affects on work ability: a focus group study. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19:1362–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03006.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Zomkowski K, Cruz de Souza B, Moreira GM, Volkmer C, Da Silva Honorio GJ, Moraes Santos G, Flores Sperandio F. Qualitative study of return to work following breast cancer treatment. Occup Med Oxf Engl. 2019;69:189–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqz024.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Lewis J, Mackenzie L. Cognitive changes after breast cancer: a scoping review to identify problems encountered by women when returning to work. Disabil Rehabil. 2022;44:5310–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2021.1919216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Vayr F, Montastruc M, Savall F, Despas F, Judic E, Basso M, Dunet C, Dalenc F, Laurent G, Soulat JM, Herin F. Work adjustments and employment among breast cancer survivors: a French prospective study. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:185–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-04799-w.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Williams AM, Khan CP, Heckler CE, Barton DL, Ontko M, Geer J, Kleckner AS, Dakhil S, Mitchell J, Mustian KM, Peppone LJ, Kipnis V, Kamen CS, O’Mara AM, Janelsins MC. Fatigue, anxiety, and quality of life in Breast cancer patients compared to non-cancer controls: a nationwide longitudinal analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021;187:275–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-06067-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all the women with breast cancer who participated in this study.

Funding

This work was funded by the Mental Health and Work Research Chair and the Foundation of the Institut universitaire en santé mentale de Montréal.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education and Pedagogy – Career counselling, University of Quebec in Montreal, Montreal, Canada

    Marc Corbière

  2. Research Centre of the Institut universitaire en santé mentale de Montréal, Montreal, Canada

    Marc Corbière, Daniel Rabouin & Jean-Philippe Lachance

  3. Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST), Montreal, Canada

    Alessia Negrini

  4. Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

    Maud Mazaniello-Chézol

  5. Department of Surgery, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Montreal, Canada

    Lucas Sideris

  6. University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada

    Lucas Sideris

  7. CISSS Montérégie Centre, Greenfield Park, Québec, Canada

    Catherine Prady

  8. Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

    Catherine Prady

  9. Health and Society institute, University of Quebec in Montreal, Montreal, Canada

    Jean-Philippe Lachance

Authors
  1. Marc Corbière
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Rabouin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alessia Negrini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maud Mazaniello-Chézol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lucas Sideris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Catherine Prady
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jean-Philippe Lachance
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MC: designed the study with the assistance of AN. MC and DR: performed the statistical analysis. JPL and MMC: coordinated the study. LS and CP: helped with the logistics of participant recruitment. MC: led the writing, with significant input from JPL and DR. JPL and DR: prepared the figures and tables. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Corbière.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical Approval

Ethics approval and consent to participate: The present study involved human participants and was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the CISSS de la Montérégie-Centre (for Hôpital Charles-Le Moyne, reference number: AA-HCLM-11-041) and the Research Ethics Committee of the CIUSSS de l’Est-de-l’Île-de-Montréal (for Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, reference number: 2017 − 845) and was conducted in accordance with their ethical standards. 

Consent to Participate

All participants provided informed consent prior to participating in the study.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Corbière, M., Rabouin, D., Negrini, A. et al. Validation of the Return-to-Work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale for Women on Sick Leave Due to Breast Cancer (ROSES-BC). J Occup Rehabil (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-023-10169-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-023-10169-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation