IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i9p5124-d800029.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supporting the Return to Work of Breast Cancer Survivors: From a Theoretical to a Clinical Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Bertrand Porro

    (Univ. Angers, Univ. Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, IRSET (Institut de Recherche en Santé, Environnement et Travail)—UMR_S 1085, SFR ICAT, F-49000 Angers, France)

  • Mario Campone

    (Oncology Department, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest, F-44805 Saint-Herblain, France
    Center for Research in Cancerology and Immunology Nantes-Angers, Inserm UMR 1232, Univ. Nantes and Univ. Angers, F-44307 Nantes, France)

  • Philippe Moreau

    (University Hospital Hôtel-Dieu, 44000 Nantes, France
    University of Nantes, 44035 Nantes, France)

  • Yves Roquelaure

    (Univ. Angers, Univ. Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, IRSET (Institut de Recherche en Santé, Environnement et Travail)—UMR_S 1085, SFR ICAT, F-49000 Angers, France
    Univ. Angers, CHU Angers, Univ. Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, IRSET (Institut de Recherche en Santé, Environnement et Travail)—UMR_S 1085, SFR ICAT, F-49000 Angers, France)

Abstract

Promoting the return to work of breast cancer survivors is of major interest to patients, healthcare and occupational health professionals, companies, governments, and researchers worldwide. We previously conducted a French consensus study resulting in a model describing the multifactorial process of the return to work of breast cancer survivors (the REWORK-BC model). Other work has identified the transtheoretical model as a relevant theoretical framework for interventions to promote the return to work of cancer survivors. In this opinion paper, we provide a theoretically-based clinical framework describing how to support breast cancer survivors at each stage of the return-to-work process. This clinical framework considers several essential aspects of supportive care for breast cancer survivors returning to work, such as: (i) helping the patient actively self-manage, by considering her to be the main decision-maker; (ii) respecting and adapting to the patient’s choice of professional project; (iii) respecting the temporality of the patient’s choices; (iv) proposing tailored interventions; (v) implementing simple tools to promote the return to work, shared representation between the patient and a multidisciplinary team, and improvement of working conditions and the knowledge of health and occupational professionals, and managers or employers; and (vi) maintaining certain flexibility aimed at proposing, but never imposing, changes in practices. This clinical framework, specific to breast cancer survivors, could be extrapolated to other tumor types, offering a practical guide for healthcare and occupational health professionals to better understand the return-to-work process of cancer survivors. This clinical framework aims to be a usable tool for any hospital or cancer care center wishing to implement a patient-centered intervention that promotes returning to work, regardless of the country.

Suggested Citation

  • Bertrand Porro & Mario Campone & Philippe Moreau & Yves Roquelaure, 2022. "Supporting the Return to Work of Breast Cancer Survivors: From a Theoretical to a Clinical Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-13, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:9:p:5124-:d:800029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/9/5124/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/9/5124/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michiel A. Greidanus & Angela G. E. M. Boer & Angelique E. Rijk & Sonja Brouwers & Theo M. Reijke & Marie José Kersten & Jean H. G. Klinkenbijl & Roy I. Lalisang & Robert Lindeboom & Patricia J. Zonde, 2020. "The Successful Return-To-Work Questionnaire for Cancer Survivors (I-RTW_CS): Development, Validity and Reproducibility," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 13(5), pages 567-582, October.
    2. Kristopher Lamore & Thomas Dubois & Ulrike Rothe & Matilde Leonardi & Isabelle Girard & Ulf Manuwald & Soja Nazarov & Fabiola Silvaggi & Erika Guastafierro & Chiara Scaratti & Thierry Breton & Jérôme , 2019. "Return to Work Interventions for Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and a Methodological Critique," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-21, April.
    3. Caroline Alleaume & Alain Paraponaris & Marc-Karim Bendiane & Patrick Peretti-Watel & Anne-Déborah Bouhnik, 2020. "The positive effect of workplace accommodations on the continued employment of cancer survivors five years after diagnosis," Post-Print hal-02445816, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kathleen Doyle Lyons & Rachel C. Forcino & Sivan Rotenberg & Jenna E. Schiffelbein & Kali J. Morrissette & Cassandra M. Godzik & Jonathan D. Lichtenstein, 2022. "“The Last Thing You Have to Worry About”: A Thematic Analysis of Employment Challenges Faced by Cancer Survivors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-12, September.
    2. Stéphane Faury & Philémon Aurouet & Bruno Quintard & Jérôme Foucaud, 2023. "A Systematic Review on Reporting of Methods in National Surveys about Adults’ Attitudes to Lifestyle and Environmental Risk Factors for Cancer," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(9), pages 1-22, May.
    3. Fabiola Silvaggi & Michela Eigenmann & Chiara Scaratti & Erika Guastafierro & Claudia Toppo & Jaana Lindstrom & Eeva Rantala & Iñaki Imaz-Iglesia & Andrew Barnfield & Alison Maassen & Matilde Leonardi, 2020. "Employment and Chronic Diseases: Suggested Actions for The Implementation of Inclusive Policies for The Participation of People with Chronic Diseases in the Labour Market," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-9, January.
    4. Masamitsu Kobayashi & Jun Kako & Kohei Kajiwara & Ayako Ogata, 2021. "Letter to the Editor in response to Greidanus et al., June 2020, “The Successful Return-To-Work Questionnaire for Cancer Survivors (I-RTW_CS): Development, Validity and Reproducibility”," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(1), pages 139-140, January.
    5. Soja Nazarov & Ulf Manuwald & Matilde Leonardi & Fabiola Silvaggi & Jérôme Foucaud & Kristopher Lamore & Erika Guastafierro & Chiara Scaratti & Jaana Lindström & Ulrike Rothe, 2019. "Chronic Diseases and Employment: Which Interventions Support the Maintenance of Work and Return to Work among Workers with Chronic Illnesses? A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-14, May.
    6. Kollerup, Anna & Ladenburg, Jacob & Heinesen, Eskil & Kolodziejczyk, Christophe, 2021. "The importance of workplace accommodation for cancer survivors – The role of flexible work schedules and psychological help in returning to work," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    7. Guillaume Broc & Jean Baptiste Fassier & Stéphane Raffard & Olivier Lareyre, 2024. "Planning Individual and Population-Based Interventions in Global Health: Applying the DEA-A Framework to Promote Behavioral, Emotional, and/or Cognitive Change among Stakeholders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(3), pages 1-13, March.
    8. Kisook Kim & Hyohyeon Yoon, 2021. "Health-Related Quality of Life among Cancer Survivors Depending on the Occupational Status," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-16, April.
    9. José-María Figueredo & Cristina García-Ael & Andrea Gragnano & Gabriela Topa, 2020. "Well-Being at Work after Return to Work (RTW): A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-27, October.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:9:p:5124-:d:800029. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.