Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 3/2022

20-11-2021

Evaluation of Usability and Satisfaction of Two Online Tools to Guide Return to Work for Cancer Survivors on the Cancer and Work Website

Authors: Christine Maheu, Lucie Kocum, Maureen Parkinson, Lynne Robinson, Lori J. Bernstein, Margareth Santos Zanchetta, Mina Singh, Claudia Hernandez, Fatima Yashmin, Mary Jane Esplen

Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation | Issue 3/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Prompt services and work-focused support systems are needed to aid cancer survivors returning to work or finding work. Purpose This knowledge translation and implementation project focused on the knowledge users' experience and need for refinement of three work-focused tools to support return to work and maintain work following cancer through their participation in a hands-on workshop. The tools assessed for their utility are a Job Analysis Tool (JAT), a Return to Work (RTW) tool, and a bilingual Canadian website on Cancer and Work. Methods Four workshops took place in three Canadian cities. Participants included cancer survivors, healthcare professionals, and employer representatives. Following an overview of the website and tools, workshop participants (N = 28) completed qualitative and quantitative satisfaction and usability questionnaires using the System Usability Scale and open-ended questions. Qualitative data was analyzed using content analyses from the think-aloud data and from the four open-ended questions collected during the users' use of the tools and website. Results Overall, most study participants reported high satisfaction with the JAT and RTW tools, the Cancer and work website and the workshop. Good usability scores were reported for the RTW planner (73.65 ± 12.61) and the website (74.83 ± 12.36), and only acceptable usability scores for the JAT (68.53 ± 11.90). Conclusion Overall, the study documented the value of the tools and the website to support the RTW process as assessed by several key knowledge user groups. The JAT is considered a helpful procedure to identify job demands in order to guide job accommodations. Given participants' responses that the tool is useful, the next steps are to implement the recommendations for improvement and knowledge dissemination to increase its uptake and the use of job analysis overall.
Literature
1.
Bilodeau K, Tremblay D, Durand M-J. Exploration of return-to-work interventions for breast cancer patients: a scoping review. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(6):1993–2007.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Bilodeau K, Tremblay D, Durand MJ. Gaps and delays in survivorship care in the return-to-work pathway for survivors of breast cancer-a qualitative study. Curr Oncol. 2019;26(3):e414–e417.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
Tracy JK, Falk D, Thompson RJ, Scheindlin L, Adetunji F, Swanberg JE. Managing the cancer-work interface: the effect of cancer survivorship on unemployment. Cancer Manag Res. 2018;28(10):6479–6487.CrossRef
4.
Mehnert A. Employment and work-related issues in cancer survivors. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2011;77(2):109–130.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Stergiou-Kita M, Pritlove C, Holness DL, Kirsh B, van Eerd D, Duncan A, et al. Am I ready to return to work? Assisting cancer survivors to determine work readiness. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(4):699–710.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Fitch MI, Nicoll I. Returning to work after cancer: Survivors’, caregivers’, and employers’ perspectives. Psychooncology. 2019;28(4):792–798.PubMedCrossRef
7.
van Egmond MP, Duijts SF, Scholten AP, van der Beek AJ, Anema JR. Offering a tailored return to work program to cancer survivors with job loss: a process evaluation. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):1–16.
8.
Choi KS, Kim E-J, Lim J-H, Kim S-G, Lim MK, Park J-G, et al. Job loss and reemployment after a cancer diagnosis in Koreans—a prospective cohort study. Psychooncology. 2007;16(3):205–213.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Rottenberg Y, de Boer AGEM. Risk for unemployment at 10 years following cancer diagnosis among very long-term survivors: a population based study. J Cancer Surviv. 2020;14(2):151–157.PubMedCrossRef
10.
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. 2019;23:1–7.
11.
Jones JM, Olson K, Catton P, Catton CN, Fleshner NE, Krzyzanowska MK, et al. Cancer-related fatigue and associated disability in post-treatment cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(1):51–61.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Bernstein LJ, McCreath GA, Komeylian Z, Rich JB. Cognitive impairment in breast cancer survivors treated with chemotherapy depends on control group type and cognitive domains assessed: a multilevel meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017;83:417–428.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Crom DB, Ness KK, Martinez LR, Hebl MR, Robison LL, Hudson MM, et al. Workplace experiences and turnover intention among adult survivors of childhood cancer. J Cancer Surviv. 2018;12(4):469–478.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
Gehrke AK, Feuerstein M. Cancer, comorbidity and workplace discrimination: the US experience. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2017;26(5):e12748.
15.
Bouknight RR, Bradley CJ, Luo Z. Correlates of return to work for breast cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(3):345–353.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Ghasempour M, Rahmani A, Davoodi A, Sheikhalipour Z, Ziaeei JE, Abri F. Return to work and its relation to financial distress among Iranian cancer survivors. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(6):2257–2261.PubMedCrossRef
17.
van Egmond MP, Duijts SFA, Loyen A, Vermeulen SJ, van der Beek AJ, Anema JR. Barriers and facilitators for return to work in cancer survivors with job loss experience: a focus group study. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2017;26(5):e12420.
18.
de Boer AGEM, Taskila T, Ojajärvi A, van Dijk FJH, Verbeek JHAM. Cancer survivors and unemployment: a meta-analysis and meta-regression. JAMA. 2009;301(7):753–762.PubMedCrossRef
19.
de Boer AGEM, Greidanus MA, Dewa CS, Duijts SFA, Tamminga SJ. Introduction to special section on: current topics in cancer survivorship and work. J Cancer Surviv. 2020;14(2):101–105.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
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):190–197.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Parkinson M, Maheu C. Cancer and work. Canad Oncol Nurs J. 2019;29(4):258–266.
22.
23.
Parkinson M. Cancer and returning to work: a practical guide for cancer patients. In: Nitkin P, Greenbank D, Tanliao J, Payeur N, Baker V, Myers P, et al., editors. Vancouver: BC Cancer Agency; 2014.
24.
Parkinson M. Your “Work Book” cancer and returning to work. Vancouver: BC Cancer Agency; 2012.
25.
Woods SA, Hinton DP. What do people really do at work? job analysis and design. In: Chmiel N, editor. An introduction to work and organizational psychology: an international perspective. Oxford: Wiley; 2017. p. 1–24.
26.
Brannick M, Levine E, Morgeson F. Job and work ANALYSIS: methods, research, and applications for human resource management. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Inc.; 2007.
27.
Williams-Whitt K, Bültmann U, Amick B, Munir F, Tveito TH, Anema JR, et al. Workplace interventions to prevent disability from both the scientific and practice perspectives: a comparison of scientific literature, grey literature and stakeholder observations. J Occup Rehabil. 2016;26(4):417–433.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
28.
Wong J, Kallish N, Crown D, Capraro P, Trierweiler R, Wafford QE, et al. Job accommodations, return to work and job retention of people with physical disabilities: A systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31(3):474–490.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Nitkin P, Parkinson M, Schultz IZ. Cancer and work—a Canadian perspective. Can Assoc Psychol Oncol 2011
30.
Larsen B, Aisbett B. Subjective job task analyses for physically demanding occupations: what is best practice? Ergonomics. 2012;55(10):1266–1277.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Mitchell KE, Alliger GM, Morfopoulos R. Toward an ADA-appropriate job analysis. Hum Resour Manag Rev. 1997;7(1):5–26.
32.
Stergiou-Kita M, Pritlove C, van Eerd D, Holness LD, Kirsh B, Duncan A, et al. The provision of workplace accommodations following cancer: survivor, provider, and employer perspectives. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(3):489–504.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Creswell JW. A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2015.
34.
Alberts NM, Badawy SM, Hodges J, Estepp JH, Nwosu C, Khan H, et al. Development of the incharge health mobile app to improve adherence to hydroxyurea in patients with sickle cell disease: user-centered design approach. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020;8(5):e14884.
35.
Biediger-Friedman L, Crixell SH, Silva M, Markides BR, Smith KS. User-centered design of a Texas WIC app: a focus group investigation. Am J Health Behav. 2016;40(4):461–471.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Sadler GR, Lee H-C, Lim RS-H, Fullerton J. Recruitment of hard-to-reach population subgroups via adaptations of the snowball sampling strategy. Nurs Health Sci. 2010;12(3):369–374.
37.
Logan J, Graham ID. Toward a comprehensive interdisciplinary model of health care research use. Sci Commun. 1998;20(2):227–246.CrossRef
38.
Hogan DL, Logan J. The Ottawa model of research use: a guide to clinical innovation in the NICU. Clin Nurse Spec. 2004;18(5):255–261.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Yardley L, Morrison LG, Andreou P, Joseph J, Little P. Understanding reactions to an internet-delivered health-care intervention: accommodating user preferences for information provision. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010;17(10):52.CrossRef
40.
McDonald S, Edwards HM, Zhao T. Exploring think-alouds in usability testing: an international survey. IEEE Trans Profess Commun. 2012;55(1):2–19.CrossRef
41.
Jaspers MWM, Steen T, van den Bos C, Geenen M. The think aloud method: a guide to user interface design. Int J Med Inf. 2004;73(11–12):781–795.CrossRef
42.
Jaspers MWM. A comparison of usability methods for testing interactive health technologies: methodological aspects and empirical evidence. Int J Med Inf. 2009;78(5):340–353.CrossRef
43.
Babatunde FO, MacDermid J, Grewal R, Macedo L, Szekeres M. Development and usability testing of a web-based and therapist-assisted coping skills program for managing psychosocial problems in individuals with hand and upper limb injuries: mixed methods study. JMIR Hum Factors. 2020;7(2):e17088.
44.
Bangor A, Kortum PT, Miller JT. An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. Int J Hum Comput Interact. 2008;24(6):574–594.CrossRef
45.
Brooke J. SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, McCellands IL, editors. Usability evaluation in industry. London: Taylor and Francis; 1996. p. 189–94.
46.
Bangor A, Korum P, Miller J. Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. JUS. 2009;4(3):114–123.
47.
Nielsen, Jakob. Designing Web Usability. New Riders Publishing; 1999.
48.
Bevan N, Barnum C, Cockton G, Nielsen J, Spool J, Wixon D. The, “magic number 5” Is it enough for web testing? CHI ’03 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’03. New York: ACM Press; 2003. pp. 698–699.
49.
Bengtsson M. How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. Nurs Plus Open. 2016;2:8–14.CrossRef
50.
Canadian Partnership Against Cancer - Cancer Journey Advisory. Programs and resources to facilitate return to work for people with cancer or other chronic diseases: Environmental scan. Toronto, ON: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; 2012. p. 82.
51.
Murray K, Lam KBH, McLoughlin D, Sadhra SS. Factors in removing job restrictions for cancer survivors in the united kingdom royal air force. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29(1):25–30.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Patil S, Lu H, Saunders CL, Potoglou D, Robinson N. Public preferences for electronic health data storage, access, and sharing—evidence from a pan-European survey. J Am Med Inf Assoc. 2016;23(6):1096–1106.CrossRef
53.
Evans RS. Electronic health records: then, now, and in the future. Yearb Med Inform. 2016;20(Suppl 1):S48–S61.
54.
Greidanus MA, de Rijk AE, Frings-Dresen MHW, Tiedtke CM, Brouwers S, de Boer AGEM, et al. The use and perceived usefulness of an online toolbox targeted at employers (miles intervention) for enhancing successful return to work of cancer survivors. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31(2):393–404.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Gignac MAM, Bowring J, Jetha A, Beaton DE, Breslin FC, Franche R-L, et al. Disclosure, privacy and workplace accommodation of episodic disabilities: organizational perspectives on disability communication-support processes to sustain employment. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31(1):153–165.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Tiedtke CM, Dierckx de Casterlé B, Frings-Dresen MHW, De Boer AGEM, Greidanus MA, Tamminga SJ, et al. Employers’ experience of employees with cancer: trajectories of complex communication. J Cancer Surviv. 2017;11(5):562–577.
57.
Hyman MH. Guides to the evaluation of work abily and return to work. 2011.
58.
Skaczkowski G, Asahina A, Wilson C. Returning to work after cancer in Australia: what facilitates a positive return to work experience? J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31(1):41–49.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Dahodwala M, Geransar R, Babion J, de Grood J, Sargious P. The impact of the use of video-based educational interventions on patient outcomes in hospital settings: a scoping review. Patient Educ Couns. 2018;101(12):2116–2124.PubMedCrossRef
60.
61.
Aasdahl L, Vasseljen O, Gismervik SØ, Johnsen R, Fimland MS. Two-year follow-up of a randomized clinical trial of inpatient multimodal occupational rehabilitation vs outpatient acceptance and commitment therapy for sick listed workers with musculoskeletal or common mental disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2021:1–8
62.
Zaman ACGNM, Tytgat KMAJ, Klinkenbijl JHG, Boer FC den, Brink MA, Brinkhuis JC, et al. Effectiveness of a tailored work-related support intervention for patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31(2):323–338.
63.
Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003.
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of Usability and Satisfaction of Two Online Tools to Guide Return to Work for Cancer Survivors on the Cancer and Work Website
Authors
Christine Maheu
Lucie Kocum
Maureen Parkinson
Lynne Robinson
Lori J. Bernstein
Margareth Santos Zanchetta
Mina Singh
Claudia Hernandez
Fatima Yashmin
Mary Jane Esplen
Publication date
20-11-2021
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation / Issue 3/2022
Print ISSN: 1053-0487
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3688
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-021-10011-w

Other articles of this Issue 3/2022

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 3/2022 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Building a Common Language to Facilitate Discussion Among Stakeholders in Work Disability: A Consensus Group Approach

OriginalPaper

The Readiness for Return to Work Scale; Does it Help in Evaluation of Return to Work?

OriginalPaper

Healthy Minds: Group Cognitive-Behavioral Intervention for Sustainable Return to Work After a Sick Leave Due to Depression

Review

Employment Sustainability for People with Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review

Review

What are the Predictors of Return to Work for People With Elbow, Wrist, and Hand Conditions? A Systematic Review

OriginalPaper

A Standpoint Approach to Return-to-Work Coordination: Understanding Union Roles