Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Rehabilitation and return to work after cancer — instruments and practices

1 004 vues

Publié le

Rehabilitation and return to work after cancer – How could instruments and practices support workers and employers? See our editable ppt for experts

Publié dans : Santé
  • Login to see the comments

Rehabilitation and return to work after cancer — instruments and practices

  1. 1. Safety and health at work is everyone’s concern. It’s good for you. It’s good for business. Rehabilitation and return to work after cancer — instruments and practices Focus: OSH experts
  2. 2. 2 http://osha.europa.eu Content  Background  Project overview: methodology  Methodology’s strengths and limitations  Results • Review of the literature: rehabilitation and RTW after cancer diagnosis • Overview of instruments, practices, policies and interventions • Innovative instruments, practices, policies and interventions • Programmes in enterprises and employers’ experiences • Implementation of instruments, practices, policies and interventions — barriers • Implementation of instruments, practices, policies and interventions — facilitators  Recommendations for research
  3. 3. 3 http://osha.europa.eu Background: employment after a cancer diagnosis  Increase in the number of workers diagnosed with cancer at the workplace • Number of cancer patients of working age is increasing • Better treatment and higher survival rates • Increasing retirement age • Ageing working population • 3.4 million new cases of cancer each year in Europe • Of which 1.4 million people are of working age each year  Cancer and return to work is an OSH problem of increasing importance • Of all chronic medical conditions, cancer has by far the highest prevalence of work loss and reduction in work functioning 1 • Average RTW rate: 64% after 18 months 2 • Cancer survivors: likelihood of unemployment is 37% higher 3 • Cancer survivors: likelihood of disability pension is three times higher 3 1 Kessler 2001, JOEM; 2 Mehnert 2013; 3 De Boer et al. 2009, JAMA
  4. 4. 4 http://osha.europa.eu Background: RTW after a cancer diagnosis is important  RTW after cancer is important • Worker − Quality of life for cancer survivors − Income and insurance − Structure in normal life and social contacts • Employer − Keep experienced employees in companies − Reduce financial impact on companies and society  Optimising the rehabilitation and RTW of workers with cancer is essential
  5. 5. 5 http://osha.europa.eu Background: RTW after a cancer diagnosis is important  Policies, programmes and instruments to support RTW process of workers with cancer are important • Modifiable factors provide opportunities for interventions to enhance cancer patients’ RTW • Despite a limited number of interventions aimed at enhancing cancer patients’ RTW, little is known about: − their success factors − facilitators of their implementation in other settings − barriers to their implementation in other settings • Policies and practices are needed to avoid problems • Employers need advice in assisting the worker affected by cancer while returning to work
  6. 6. 6 http://osha.europa.eu Project overview: methodology Task 1: Background information on rehabilitation and RTW after cancer • Scientific literature search • Grey literature search • Online questionnaire Task 3: Examples of companies’ experiences • Semi-structured interviews with stakeholders* in eight companies in NL, BE, IE, UK (two to four interviews in each company) • Structured qualitative analysis *Worker, employer, occupational physician, representative of trade union Task 2: Detailed descriptions of policies, systems, programmes and instruments in the field of rehabilitation/RTW after cancer • Grey literature search • Interviews with programme leaders of seven programmes Task 4: Identification of facilitators of and barriers to implementation of programmes to improve RTW of cancer-diagnosed workers • Four semi-structured focus groups with intermediaries** in NL, BE, IE, UK • Structured qualitative analysis **OSH service providers, labour inspectors, occupational health services, HR managers, healthcare providers, government representatives, trade union representatives, networks/NGOs
  7. 7. 7 http://osha.europa.eu Methodology’s strengths and limitations  Strengths • Systematic review • Extensive literature • Extensive description of programmes • Extensive knowledge of programmes • Extensive information from different experts through interviews and focus groups in four countries • Same protocol for interviewing, focus groups and analysis in four countries  Limitations • No data saturation because of four countries involved • The extent to which findings can be applied to all EU countries might be limited, as not all EU countries were involved
  8. 8. 8 http://osha.europa.eu Review of literature: health implications and costs  Health and safety implications for workers affected by cancer • Effects of cancer and its treatment on health: − Psychological and cognitive symptoms, e.g. depression, anxiety and concentration problems − Physical symptoms: mainly fatigue • Occupational implications: − Diminished work productivity − Work ability impairments and reduced functioning  Costs for workers, employers and society • Sick leave and no RTW: − Financial loss for the worker, the employer and society • Total economic loss to European Union owing to lost working days as a result of cancer: €9.5 billion in 2009 https://osha.europa.eu/en/tools-and-publications/publications/rehabilitation-and-return-work-after-cancer-literature-review
  9. 9. 9 http://osha.europa.eu Review of the literature: occupational cancer and SMEs  Work-related and occupational cancer • RTW issues seem to be no different from those concerning non-occupational cancers − Most occupational cancers have long latency − Exposure to carcinogens at work may be unknown  Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) • RTW of cancer patients seems more problematic for those in SMEs • Barriers − Information and resources for RTW programmes are lacking − Fewer alternative jobs and tasks • Facilitators − Family-like atmosphere: more supportive environment https://osha.europa.eu/en/tools-and-publications/publications/rehabilitation-and-return-work-after-cancer-literature-review
  10. 10. 10 http://osha.europa.eu Overview of instruments, practices, policies and interventions in Europe  In tasks 1 and 2, 78 instruments, practices, policies and interventions were found in: • 13 European countries (69) • USA and Australia (9)  Instruments, practices, policies and interventions include: • Training • Providing information − by phone − online − on paper
  11. 11. 11 http://osha.europa.eu Interventions aimed at workers and employers  Aimed at workers • Workplace accommodations, including: − workload − tasks − assistance • Information and training on cancer and RTW issues • Psycho-educational interventions • Rehabilitation services • Job coaching  Aimed at employers • Support for employers in constructing RTW plans for workers with cancer • Workplace accommodations to facilitate RTW • Improved communication between the employee and co-workers • Factual information on diagnosis and treatment of cancer • Guidelines
  12. 12. 12 http://osha.europa.eu Innovative interventions: Macmillan and municipality-based programme 1. Working through cancer programme of Macmillan Cancer Support (UK) • Online information, support, training, tools, videos • Help for different stakeholders − people with cancer and their families/carers − health and social care professionals − employers 2. Municipality-based occupational rehabilitation programme (Denmark) • Individual, tailored to worker’s needs • Involves different stakeholders − hospital (nurses) − employer − job consultant − worker
  13. 13. 13 http://osha.europa.eu Innovative interventions: in-hospital and work reintegration agencies 3. In-hospital rehabilitation intervention (the Netherlands) • Early intervention • Involves different stakeholders 4. Work reintegration agency Rentree (Belgium) • Involves different stakeholders • Worker chooses who is involved in the RTW process • Tailored to the worker 5. Work reintegration agency Re-turn (the Netherlands) • Includes issues regarding work, home, family, relationships and physical/mental effects of treatment and RTW • Involves different stakeholders
  14. 14. 14 http://osha.europa.eu Innovative interventions: work reintegration agency and booklet 6. Reintegration agency oPuce (the Netherlands) • Provides help for unemployed cancer patients • Results in new jobs for unemployed cancer patients • Works together with large companies 7. Booklet of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (Ireland) • Aimed at: − Breaking the stigma of cancer and RTW − Encouraging good conversations between the employer and worker − Providing assistance to unions who represent members diagnosed with breast cancer who are returning to work
  15. 15. 15 http://osha.europa.eu Programmes in enterprises and employers’ experiences  We found 28 examples of enterprises that have implemented successful measures for managing the RTW of workers with cancer • Seven European countries  They represent: • Different types of cancer • A variety of workplace sizes • A variety of activity sectors and locations • Medium-sized companies • A variety of professions  Employers are key stakeholders in the RTW process • They are in a position to create good working conditions • They can reduce discrimination and stigmatisation • They can help minimise the economic impact of a cancer diagnosis
  16. 16. 16 http://osha.europa.eu RTW programmes for occupational and work-related cancer and for SMEs  Employers’ positive attitude and understanding is crucial  We found no programmes aimed at RTW for workers with occupational and work- related cancer  Companies with fewer than 250 workers (SMEs) lack information and resources for RTW strategies or programmes
  17. 17. 17 http://osha.europa.eu Communication and project organisation in companies  Communication between companies and workers • Depends on the size of the company − In smaller companies, the communication lines seemed to be shorter and the worker was likely to be informed sooner • Depends on the situation of the worker, including the severity of the medical diagnosis and their personal preferences  Project organisation within companies • Some programmes were actual policies within the companies • Others were organised by external agencies • Some had teams within the company that were responsible for the RTW programme
  18. 18. 18 http://osha.europa.eu Implementation of instruments, practices, policies and interventions – barriers  Barriers • Companies being unable to provide work adjustments • Occupational healthcare after treatment phase not being covered by the health insurer • Lack of clarity about who is responsible for RTW • Cultural stigma of cancer diagnosis • Cultural misconceptions about possibilities of working after cancer diagnosis • Lack of time • Financial difficulties • Lack of knowledge and insufficient skills at the workplace to support the RTW of the worker with cancer • Privacy legislation that hinders open communication, although this is the patient’s statutory right • Failure to address work immediately from the start of treatment • Attending physicians being too protective regarding RTW
  19. 19. 19 http://osha.europa.eu Implementation of instruments, practices, policies and interventions — facilitators  Facilitators • Communication with worker and between stakeholders • Multidisciplinary programme including psychosocial and physical aspects, and occupational healthcare • Flexible programme (tailored to the worker’s situation) • Knowledge among HR personnel and supervisors on cancer and work via, for example, workshops • Company’s positive policy • Structural implementation of an RTW programme within the company • Training of supervisors, HR personnel and case managers in cancer and work aspects, e.g. long-term side effects, communicating with the worker with cancer, and elements of an RTW programme • Legal possibilities of offering part-time work
  20. 20. 20 http://osha.europa.eu Recommendations for research  More research is needed on the cost-effectiveness of programmes  Development of new, multidisciplinary interventions that take psychosocial, physical and occupational healthcare into account • Successful programmes should focus not only on RTW but also on remaining in work once a worker has returned  Development of interventions aimed at employers • Companies should allocate enough time, finances and training in knowledge and skills for the implementation of the programmes to be successful • Need for practical information regarding, for example, reasonable accommodation within the organisation
  21. 21. 21 http://osha.europa.eu Recommendations for research  More research and knowledge is needed on programmes and policies in SMEs • SMEs should be provided with help. It is difficult for them to implement RTW programmes, because it is harder for them to accommodate work modifications and provide gradual RTW, as they have less flexibility  More research is needed on programmes and policies for work-related and occupational cancers  Work should be assessed earlier • Occupational health physicians should have access to the worker with cancer and should support both the worker and the employer early in the diagnosis and treatment process