The impact of personal-, disease- and work-related factors on work ability of women with breast cancer living in the community: a cross-sectional survey study
- 406 Downloads
The aims of this study were to identify the work ability (WA) of breast cancer (BC) survivors during the course of their illness, and the relationships between personal-, disease-, and work-related factors, and their WA.
This is a cross-sectional survey study. One hundred fifty-one participants with the response rate of 88.9% were recruited from the community in 2014 and 2015.
BC survivors’ WA was at its highest before diagnosis, and then dropped to the lowest during treatment. Although their current WA had improved, it has not bounced back to that before diagnosis. The resignation rate was 35.8%. Factors positively associated with current WA included (a) age and year of diagnosis, (b) physical and psychological health and (c) WA before diagnosis or during treatment, working years, work control and mastery. However, compliance with appropriate healthy eating habits and believing in personal health controlled by chance were negatively associated with current WA. Furthermore, the participants would more likely to have higher current WA if they (a) were more optimistic with good stress management; (b) currently were not receiving treatment or other illnesses; (c) perceived less effects of their health problems, physical workloads or their cancer diagnoses on their work and (d) perceived continue to work in the next 2 years, with good ability to handle physical and mental work.
This study confirmed that most BC survivors continued to work after their diagnoses. The factors affecting their WA were multifactorial. It is important to enhance their positive thinking.
KeywordsBreast cancer Work ability Course of the illness Workplace psychological intervention Work culture
The study was funded by the School of Nursing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University (G-UA65). The authors are grateful to BC survivors for their participation in the study and the organizations allowing us to recruit BC survivors for the study.
KC: Planned the study; participated in the data collection; performed data analysis and finalized the manuscript
SYSC: Planned the study; participated in the data collection; revised and proofread the manuscript
AC: Planned the study; participated in the data collection; revised and proofread the manuscript
DC: participated in the data collection; revised and proofread the manuscript
SYPC: Planned the study; recruited subjects; revised and proofread the manuscript
All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Ethical approval (reference number: HSEARS20130909002-03) has been granted by The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, and the access permission has been obtained from the corresponding organizations.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- 8.De Boer A, Frings-Dresen M, Feuerstein M (2016) Improving return to work in cancer survivors. In: Schultz IZ, Gatchel RJ (eds) Handbook of return to work: from research to practice [Internet]. London: Springer. https://books.google.com.hk/books?id=TPLuCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA501&lpg=PA501&dq=return+to+work+model+for+breast+cancer+survivors&source=bl&ots=pIFiEUSoC5&sig=YAYiOOXKt2dPKE9KoMnNlPkz_9w&hl=zh-TW&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi06_Gr4aTRAhXFJZQKHbhHBWcQ6AEIdzAJ#v=onepage&q=return%20to%20work%20model%20for%20breast%20cancer%20survivors&f=false
- 17.Blinder VS, Murphy MM, Vahdat LT, Gold HT, de Melo-Martin I, Hayes MK, Scheff RJ, Chuang E, Moore A, Mazumdar M (2011) Employment after a breast cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study of ethically diverse urban women. Journal of Community Health (November 23). doi: 10.1007/s10900-011-9509-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (2010) Work ability index study for aging workers. Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, TaiwanGoogle Scholar
- 20.Morschhauser M, Sochert R (2006) Healthy work in an ageing Europe: strategies and instruments for prolonged working life. European Network for Workplace Health Promotion, Essen, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- 21.Tuomi K, Ilmarinen J, Jahkola A et al (1998) Work ability index. Helsinki, Finish Institute of Occupational HealthGoogle Scholar
- 22.Nordic Council of Ministers (2007) Review of psychological and social factors at work and suggestions for the General Nordic Questionnaire (QPSNordic). Denmark: Norden.Google Scholar
- 23.Walker S, Hill-Polerecky DM (1996) Psychometric evaluation of the health-promoting lifestyle profile II. Unpublished manuscript, University of Nebraska, Omaha, NEGoogle Scholar
- 27.The World Bank (2016) Labor Force, Female (% of Total Labor Force) http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.TOTL.FE.ZS
- 29.Wells M, Williams B, Firnigl D, Lang H, Coyle J, Kroll T, MacGillivray S (2013) Supporting ‘work-related goals’ rather than ‘return to work’ after cancer? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of 25 qualitative studies. Psycho-Oncology 22:1208–1219. doi: 10.1002/pon.3148 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 33.WHO (2017) Healthy Workplaces: a WHO Global Model for Action http://www.who.int/occupational_health/healthy_workplaces/en/Google Scholar
- 34.Nilsson MI, Saboonchi F, Alexanderson K, Olsson M, Wennman-Larsen A, Petersson LM (2016) Changes in importance of work and vocational satisfaction during the 2 years after breast cancer surgery and factors associated with this. Journal of Cancer Survivorship 10:564–572. doi: 10.1007/s11764-015-0502-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar