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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Cancer
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Study protocol

Effectiveness of work-related medical rehabilitation in cancer patients: study protocol of a cluster-randomized multicenter trial

Authors: Julian Wienert, Betje Schwarz, Matthias Bethge

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Work is a central resource for cancer survivors as it not only provides income but also impacts health and quality of life. Additionally, work helps survivors to cope with the perceived critical life event. The German Pension Insurance provides medical rehabilitation for working-age patients with chronic diseases to improve and restore their work ability, and support returning to or staying at work, and thus tries to sustainably avoid health-related early retirement. Past research showed that conventional medical rehabilitation programs do not support returning to work sufficiently and that work-related medical rehabilitation programs report higher return-to-work rates across several health conditions, when compared to medical rehabilitation. Therefore, the current study protocol outlines an effectiveness study of such a program for cancer survivors.

Methods

To evaluate the effectiveness of work-related medical rehabilitation in cancer patients we conduct a cluster-randomized multicenter trial. In total, 504 rehabilitation patients between 18 and 60 years with a Karnofsky Performance Status of ≥70 %, a preliminary positive social-medical prognosis of employability for at least 3 h/day within the next 6 months and an elevated risk of not returning to work will be recruited in four inpatient rehabilitation centers. Patients are randomized to the work-related medical rehabilitation program or the conventional medical rehabilitation program based on their week of arrival at each rehabilitation center. The work-related medical rehabilitation program comprises additional work-related diagnostics, multi-professional team meetings, an introductory session as well as work-related functional capacity training, work-related psychological groups, and social counseling. All additional components are aimed at the adjustment of the patients’ capacity in relation to their individual job demands. Role functioning defines the main study outcome and will be assessed with the EORTC-QLQ30. Secondary outcome measures are the remaining scales of the EORTC-QLQ30, fatigue, self-rated work ability, disease coping, participation in working life, realization of work-related goals and therapies during rehabilitation, and treatment satisfaction.

Discussion

A positive evaluation of work-related medical rehabilitation in cancer patients is expected due to the promising findings on the effectiveness of such programs for patients with other health conditions. Results may support the dissemination of work-related medical rehabilitation programs in German cancer rehabilitation.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00007770. Registered 13 May 2015.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
World Health Organization. World Cancer Report 2014. Lyon: World Health Organization; 2014.
2.
Robert Koch Institute and the Association of Population-based Cancer Registries in Germany. Cancer in Germany 2009/2010. 9th ed. Berlin: Robert Koch Institute; 2014.
3.
Allemani C, Weir HK, Carreira H, Harewood R, Spika D, Wang X-S, et al. Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995–2009: analysis of individual data for 25 676 887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2). Lancet. 2015;385(9972):977–1010.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Petersson L-M, Wennman-Larsen A, Nilsson M, Olsson M, Alexanderson K. Work situation and sickness absence in the initial period after breast cancer surgery. Acta Oncol. 2011;50(2):282–8.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Paul KI, Batinic B. The need for work: Jahoda’s latent functions of employment in a representative sample of the German population. J Organ Behav. 2010;31(1):45–64.CrossRef
6.
Chirikos TN, Russell-Jacobs A, Cantor AB. Indirect economic effects of long-term breast cancer survival. Cancer Pract. 2002;10(5):248–55.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Griep Y, Kinnunen U, Nätti J, De Cuyper N, Mauno S, Mäkikangas A, et al. The effects of unemployment and perceived job insecurity: a comparison of their association with psychological and somatic complaints, self-rated health and life satisfaction. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2016;89(1):147–62.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Anderson NB, Armstead CA. Toward understanding the association of socioeconomic-status and health - a new challenge for the biopsychosocial approach. Psychosom Med. 1995;57(3):213–25.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Wolfenden B, Grace M. Returning to work after stroke: a review. Int J Rehabil Res. 2009;32(2):93–7.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Alaszewski A, Alaszewski H, Potter J, Penhale B. Working after a stroke: survivors’ experiences and perceptions of barriers to and facilitators of the return to paid employment. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29(24):1858–69.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Provencher HL, Gregg R, Mead S, Mueser KT. The role of work in the recovery of persons with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2002;26(2):132–44.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Strober LB, Christodoulou C, Benedict RH, Westervelt HJ, Melville P, Scherl WF, et al. Unemployment in multiple sclerosis: the contribution of personality and disease. Mult Scler. 2012;18(5):647–53.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Rasmussen DM, Elverdam B. The meaning of work and working life after cancer: an interview study. Psychooncology. 2008;17(12):1232–8.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Kennedy F, Haslam C, Munir F, Pryce J. Returning to work following cancer: a qualitative exploratory study into the experience of returning to work following cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2007;16(1):17–25.CrossRef
15.
Petersson L-M, Nilsson M, Alexanderson K, Olsson M, Wennman-Larsen A. How do women value work shortly after breast cancer surgery and are their valuations associated with being on sick leave? J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23(3):391–9.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Nilsson MI, Olsson M, Wennman-Larsen A, Petersson LM, Alexanderson K. Women’s reflections and actions regarding working after breast cancer surgery – a focus group study. Psychooncology. 2013;22(7):1639–44.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Amir Z, Brocky J. Cancer survivorship and employment: epidemiology. Occup Med (Lond). 2009;59(6):373–7.CrossRef
18.
de Boer AG, Taskila T, Ojajarvi A, van Dijk FJ, Verbeek JH. Cancer survivors and unemployment: a meta-analysis and meta-regression. Jama. 2009;301(7):753–62.CrossRefPubMed
19.
de Boer AGEM, Taskila T, Tamminga SJ, Frings-Dresen MHW, Feuerstein M, Verbeek JH. Interventions to enhance return-to-work for cancer patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;2:CD007569.
20.
Feuerstein M, Todd B, Moskowitz M, Bruns G, Stoler M, Nassif T, et al. Work in cancer survivors: a model for practice and research. J Cancer Surviv. 2010;4(4):415–37.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Mehnert A. Employment and work-related issues in cancer survivors. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2011;77(2):109–30.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Mehnert A, de Boer A, Feuerstein M. Employment challenges for cancer survivors. Cancer. 2013;119:2151–9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Nilsson S, Ekberg K. Employability and work ability: returning to the labour market after long-term absence. Work. 2013;44(4):449–57.PubMed
24.
Hoefsmit N, Houkes I, Nijhuis FN. Intervention characteristics that facilitate return to work after sickness absence: a systematic literature review. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(4):462–77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Hoving JL, Broekhuizen MLA, Frings-Dresen MHW. Return to work of breast cancer survivors: a systematic review of intervention studies. BMC Cancer. 2009;9:117.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund. Reha-Bericht Update 2014: Die medzinische und berufliche Rehabilitation der Rentenversicherung im Licht der Statistik. Berlin: Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund; 2014.
27.
Streibelt M, Brünger M. How many work-related therapeutic services do patients with severe restrictions of work ability receive? Analysis of a representative rehabilitation sample across indications. Rehabilitation. 2014;53(6):369–75.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Bethge M. Success factors of work-related orthopaedic rehabilitation. Rehabilitation. 2011;50(3):145–51.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Haaf HG. Findings on the effectiveness of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation. 2005;44(05):e1–e20.CrossRef
30.
Hartmann U, Ring C, Reuss-Borst M. Improvement of health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients by inpatient rehabilitation. Med Klin (Munich). 2004;99(8):422–9.CrossRef
31.
Teichmann JV. Oncological rehabilitation: evaluation of the efficiency of inpatient rehabilitation. Rehabilitation. 2002;41(1):53–63.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Weis J, Moser MT, Bartsch HH. Goal-oriented evaluation of inpatient rehabilitation programs for women with breast cancer (ZESOR-study). In: Jäckel WH, Bengel J, Herdt J, editors. Research in rehabilitation: results from a research network in Southwest Germany. Stuttgart: Schattauer; 2006. p. 162–71.
33.
Hartmann U, Kluge A, Ring C. Improvement of anxiety and depression in women with breast cancer during inpatient oncological rehabilitation - results of a prospective study. Rehabilitation. 2006;45(2):88–94.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Streibelt M, Bethge M. Prospective cohort analysis of the predictive validity of a screening instrument for severe restrictions of work ability in patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;94(8):617–26.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Lukasczik M, Wolf H-D, Gerlich C, Löffler S, Vogel H, Faller H, et al. Current state of vocationally oriented medical rehabilitation – a German perspective. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33(25-26):2646–55.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Weis J, Moser MT, Bartsch HH. Zielorientierte Evaluation stationärer onkologischer Rehabilitationsmaßnahmen (ZESOR-Studie). Freiburg im Breisgau: Klinik für Tumorbiologie, Institut für Reha-Forschung und Prävention; 2002.
37.
Streibelt M, Buschmann-Steinhage R. A profile of requirements for the performance of work related medical rehabilitation from the perspective of the statutory pension insurance. Rehabilitation. 2011;50(3):160–7.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Isernhagen SJ. Functional capacity evaluation: rationale, procedure, utility of the kinesiophysical approach. J Occup Rehabil. 1992;2(3):157–68.CrossRefPubMed
39.
40.
Bethge M, Herbold D, Trowitzsch L, Jacobi C. Work status and health-related quality of life following multimodal work hardening: a cluster randomised trial. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2011;24(3):161–72.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Streibelt M, Bethge M. Effects of intensified work-related multidisciplinary rehabilitation on occupational participation: a randomized-controlled trial in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. Int J Rehabil Res. 2014;37(1):61–6.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Kittel J, Karoff M. Improvement of worklife participation through vocationally oriented cardiac rehabilitation? Findings of a randomized control group study. Rehabilitation. 2008;47(1):14–22.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Streibelt M, Menzel-Begemann A. Does the success of work-related interventions in the rehabilitation of neurological diseases depend on the return-to-work prognosis? A re-analysis of 2 randomised controlled trials. Rehabilitation. 2015;54(4):252–8.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Koch S, Geissner E, Hillert A. Job-related effects in psychosomatic inpatient treatment: specific contributions of a cognitive-behavioural group intervention. Z Psychiatr Psych Ps. 2007;55(2):97–109.
45.
Beutel ME, Zwerenz R, Bleichner F, Vorndran A, Gustson D, Knickenberg RJ. Vocational training integrated into inpatient psychosomatic rehabilitation – short and long-term results from a controlled study. Disabil Rehabil. 2005;27(15):891–900.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Böttcher HM, Steimann M, Ullrich A, Rotsch M, Zurborn KH, Koch U, et al. Evaluation of a vocationally oriented concept within inpatient oncological rehabilitation. Rehabilitation. 2013;52(5):329–36.CrossRefPubMed
47.
World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
48.
Escorpizo R, Finger M, Glässel A, Gradinger F, Lückenkemper M, Cieza A. A systematic review of functioning in vocational rehabilitation using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):134–46.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Staal JB, Hlobil H, Twisk JW, Smid T, Koke AJ, van Mechelen W. Graded activity for low back pain in occupational health care: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(2):77–84.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Karnofsky DA, Burchenal JH. The clinical evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents in cancer. In: MacLeod CM, editor. Evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents. New York: Columbia University Press; 1949. p. 191–205.
51.
52.
Bürger W, Deck R. SIBAR – a short screening instrument for the assessment of need for occupation related treatment in medical rehabilitation. Rehabilitation. 2009;48(4):211–21.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Böttcher HM, Steimann M, Rotsch M, Zurborn K-H, Koch U, Bergelt C. Occupational stress and its association with early retirement and subjective need for occupational rehabilitation in cancer patients. Psychooncology. 2013;22(8):1807–14.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Böttcher HM, Steimann M, Ullrich A, Rotsch M, Zurborn K-H, Koch U, et al. Work-related predictors of not returning to work after inpatient rehabilitation in cancer patients. Acta Oncol. 2013;52(6):1067–75.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Borm GF, Fransen J, Lemmens WAJG. A simple sample size formula for analysis of covariance in randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(12):1234–8.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85(5):365–76.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Damm K, Roeske N, Jacob C. Health-related quality of life questionnaires in lung cancer trials: a systematic literature review. Health Econ Rev. 2013;3(1):15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
58.
Weis J, Arraras JI, Conroy T, Efficace F, Fleissner C, Görög A, et al. Development of an EORTC quality of life phase III module measuring cancer-related fatigue (EORTC QLQ-FA13). Psychooncology. 2013;22(5):1002–7.CrossRefPubMed
59.
Ilmarinen J. The Work Ability Index (WAI). Occup Med (Lond). 2007;57(2):160.CrossRef
60.
Dörner U, Muthny FA. Comparison of two coping questionnaires in cardiological rehabilitation – the ‘Trierer Skalen zur Krankheitsbewältigung’ (TSK) and the ‘Freiburger Fragebogen zur Krankheitsverarbeitung’ (FKV). Z Med Psychol. 2008;17(2,3):125–32.
61.
Klasen BW, Hallner D, Schaub C, Willburger R, Hasenbring M. Validation and reliability of the German version of the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire in primary care back pain patients. Psychosoc Med. 2004;1:Doc07.PubMedPubMedCentral
62.
Von Korff M, Ormel J, Keefe FJ, Dworkin SF. Grading the severity of chronic pain. Pain. 1992;50(2):133–49.CrossRef
63.
Bethge M, Löffler S, Schwarz B, Vogel H, Schwarze M, Neuderth S. Is the guideline for work-related medical rehabilitation successfully implemented? Rehabilitation. 2014;53(3):184–90.CrossRefPubMed
64.
Attkisson CC, Zwick R. The client satisfaction questionnaire. Psychometric properties and correlations with service utilization and psychotherapy outcome. Eval Program Plann. 1982;5(3):233–7.CrossRefPubMed
65.
Bethge M. Patient preferences and willingness to wait for a work-related orthopaedic rehabilitation: a discrete choice experiment. Gesundheitswesen. 2009;71(3):152–60.CrossRefPubMed
66.
67.
Donner A, Klar N. Design and analysis of cluster randomization trials in health research. London: Arnold; 2000.
68.
Hayes RJ, Bennett S. Simple sample size calculation for cluster-randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol. 1999;28(2):319–26.CrossRefPubMed
69.
Hayes RJ, Alexander ND, Bennett S, Cousens SN. Design and analysis issues in cluster-randomized trials of interventions against infectious diseases. Stat Methods Med Res. 2000;9(2):95–116.CrossRefPubMed
70.
Searle SR, Speed FM, Milliken GA. Population marginal means in the linear model: an alternative to least squares means. Am Stat. 1980;34(4):216–21.
71.
Lipsey MW, Wilson DB. Practical meta-analysis. Applied Social Research Methods, vol 49. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2000.
72.
Sanchez-Meca J, Marin-Martinez F, Chacon-Moscoso S. Effect-size indices for dichotomized outcomes in meta-analysis. Psychol Methods. 2003;8(4):448–67.CrossRefPubMed
73.
74.
Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51(6):1173–82.CrossRefPubMed
75.
Brookes ST, Whitely E, Egger M, Smith GD, Mulheran PA, Peters TJ. Subgroup analyses in randomized trials: risks of subgroup-specific analyses, power and sample size for the interaction test. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57(3):229–36.CrossRefPubMed
76.
Smeets RJEM, Maher CG, Nicholas MK, Refshauge KM, Herbert RD. Do psychological characteristics predict response to exercise and advice for subacute low back pain? Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61(9):1202–9.CrossRefPubMed
77.
Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134(8):663–94.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Effectiveness of work-related medical rehabilitation in cancer patients: study protocol of a cluster-randomized multicenter trial
Authors
Julian Wienert
Betje Schwarz
Matthias Bethge
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2563-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Cancer 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research article

Secreted Frizzled-Related Protein 2 (sFRP2) promotes osteosarcoma invasion and metastatic potential

Research article

Gene and miRNA expression signature of Lewis lung carcinoma LLC1 cells in extracellular matrix enriched microenvironment

Research article

Protein expression changes induced in a malignant melanoma cell line by the curcumin analogue compound D6

Case report

Antemortem diagnosis of pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy in a patient with recurrent breast cancer: a case report

Study protocol

Phase II clinical study of valproic acid plus cisplatin and cetuximab in recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of Head and Neck-V-CHANCE trial

Research article

Prognostic value of ERBB4 expression in patients with triple negative breast cancer
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits