Perceptions of Breast Cancer Survivors on the Supporting Practices of Their Supervisors in the Return-to-Work Process: A Qualitative Descriptive Study

Abstract

Purpose Supervisors are known to be key actors in ensuring the success of absent employees in their return-to-work process. However, to date, little is known about the perceptions of breast cancer survivors on the practices put in place by their supervisors to support them during this process. The objective of this study was to describe the perceptions of breast cancer survivors on the practices put in place by their supervisors to support them during their return-to-work process. Method A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with breast cancer survivors (n = 10) who had returned to work after treatment and were still at work more than 18 months later. Each interview was audio recorded and then transcribed verbatim for qualitative thematic content analysis using a semi-open codification framework. Results Participants identified three main practices put in place by their supervisors to support them and which they perceived as particularly helpful during the return-to-work process: (1) maintaining communication during their period of absence; (2) working with them to structure their return-to-work process before their actual return; and (3) allowing them flexibility in their schedule for a certain period, particularly at the beginning of the return-to-work process. Breast cancer survivors also identified an omission in the practice of employers: lack of follow-up over time. Conclusion Knowledge about the practices perceived as helpful by breast cancer survivors during their return-to-work process lays the groundwork for the eventual development of services to help breast cancer survivors in their return to work.

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

References

  1. 1.

    Canadian Cancer Society’s Advisory Committee on Cancer Statistics. Canadian Cancer Statistics. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2015.

  2. 2.

    Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60(5):277–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Jefford M, Rowland J, Grunfeld E, Richards M, Maher J, Glaser A. Implementing improved post-treatment care for cancer survivors in England, with reflections from Australia, Canada and the USA. Br J Cancer. 2013;108(1):14–20.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Hebdon M, Foli K, McComb S. Survivor in the cancer context: a concept analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2015;71(8):1774–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Canadian Cancer Society. Life after cancer. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2008.

  6. 6.

    Yarker J, Munir F, Bains M, Kalawsky K, Haslam C. The role of communication and support in return to work following cancer-related absence. Psychooncology. 2010;19(10):1078–85.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Short PF, Vasey JJ, Tunceli K. Employment pathways in a large cohort of adult cancer survivors. Cancer. 2005;103(6):1292–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Tjulin A, MacEachen E, Ekberg K. Exploring workplace actors experiences of the Social Organization of return-to-work. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(3):311–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Mehnert A. Employment and work-related issues in cancer survivors. Crit Rev Oncol Hemat. 2011;77(2):109–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Spelten ER, Sprangers M, Verbeek J. Factors reported to influence the return to work of cancer survivors: a literature review. Psychooncology. 2002;11(2):124–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    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(4):415–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Wells M, Williams B, Firnigl D, Lang H, Coyle J, Kroll T, MacGillivray S. Supporting work-related goals rather than return to work after cancer? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of 25 qualitatives studies. Psychooncology. 2013;22(6):1208–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Durand MJ, Corbière M, Coutu MF, Reinharz D, Albert V. A review of best work-absence management and return-to-work practices for workers with musculoskeletal or common mental disorders. Work. 2014;48(4):579–89.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Pomaki G, Franche R, Khushrushahi N, Murray E, Lampinen T, Mah P. Best practices for return-to-work/stay-at-work interventions for workers with mental health conditions. Vancouver: Occupational Health and Safety Agency of Healthcare in BC; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Boot CRL, Hogg-Johnson S, Bültmann U, Amick BC III, van der Beek AJ. Difference in predictors for return to work following musculoskeletal injury between workers with and without somatic comorbidities. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2014;87(8):871–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Taskila T, Lindbohm ML. Factors affecting cancer survivors’ employment and work ability. Acta Oncol. 2007;43(5):914–20.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Amir Z, Neary D, Luker K. Cancer survivors’ views of work 3 years post diagnosis: a UK perspective. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2008;12(3):190–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Sandelowski M. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Res Nurs Health. 2000;23(4):334–40.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Dunbrack J. Breast cancer: economic impact and labour force re-entry. Ottawa: Breast Cancer Network; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldana J. Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    NICE. Managing long term sickness absence and incapacity of work. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE); 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Aas RW, Ellingsen K, Lindoe P, Möller A. Leadership qualities in the return to work process: a content analysis. J Occup Rehabil. 2008;18(4):335–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Franche RL, Cullen K, Clarke J, Irvin E, Sinclair S, Frank J. Workplace-based return-to-work interventions: a systematic review of the quantitative literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15(4):607–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Nilsson MI, Petersson LM, Wennman-Larsen A, Olsson M, Vaez M, Alexanderson K. Adjustment and social support at work early after breast cancer surgery and its associations with sickness absence. Psychooncology. 2013;22(12):2755–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    McKay G, Knott V, Delfabbro P. Return to work and cancer: the Australian experience. J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23(1):99–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Hoefsmit N, Houkes I Nijhuis F. Environmental and personal factors that support early return-to-work: a qualitative study using the ICF as a framework. Work. 2014;48(2):203–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Pryce J, Munir F, Haslam C. Cancer survivorship and work: symptoms, supervisor response, co-worker disclosure and work adustment. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17(1):83–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Nachreiner NM, Dagher RK, McGovern PM, Baker BA, Alexander BH, Gerberich SG. Successful return to work for cancer survivors. AAOHN J. 2007;55(7):290–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Laperrière A. Qualitative methods' scientificity criteria. In: Poupart J, Deslauriers JP, Groulx LH, Laperrière A, Mayer R, Pires AP, editors. Qualitative research: epistemological and methodological issues (french). Montréal: Gaëtan Morin éditeur; 1997. p. 365–89.

  30. 30.

    Tamminga SJ, de Boer AGEM, Bos MMEM, Fons G, Kitzen JJEM, Plaisier PW, Verbeek JHAM, Frings-Dresen MHW. A hospital-based work support intervention to enhance the return to work of cancer patients: a process evaluation. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(4):565–78.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maryse Caron.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical Approval

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5).

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients to be included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Caron, M., Durand, M. & Tremblay, D. Perceptions of Breast Cancer Survivors on the Supporting Practices of Their Supervisors in the Return-to-Work Process: A Qualitative Descriptive Study. J Occup Rehabil 28, 89–96 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9698-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Breast neoplasms
  • Survivors
  • Return to work
  • Workplace