Download PDF
Physikalische Medizin, Rehabilitationsmedizin, Kurortmedizin 2024; 34(02): 72-78
DOI: 10.1055/a-2006-4248
Original Article

Efficacy of Work-Related Support Rehabilitation for Patients with Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Wirksamkeit der berufsbezogenen unterstützenden Rehabilitation bei Krebspatienten: Eine Metaanalyse von randomisierten kontrollierten Studien
Gang Li
1   Department of Oncology, Tianshui Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Gansu Province
,
Bin Wang
2   General Surgery, Tianshui Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Gansu Province
,
Yunzhou Hu
2   General Surgery, Tianshui Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Gansu Province
,
Xiaolong Wang
2   General Surgery, Tianshui Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Gansu Province
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Correction: Efficacy of Work-Related Support Rehabilitation for Patients with Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled TrialsPhysikalische Medizin, Rehabilitationsmedizin, Kurortmedizin 2024; 34(02): e2-e2
DOI: 10.1055/a-2036-8364

Abstract

Introduction The efficacy of work-related support rehabilitation for patients with cancer remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of work-related support rehabilitation on the quality of life in patients with cancer.

Methods We have searched Pubmed, Embase, Web of science, Ebsco, and Cochrane library databases through August 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of work-related support rehabilitation on the quality of life in patients with cancer. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.

Results Four RCTs are included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with usual care for cancer patients, work-related support is associated with significantly improved quality of life physical score (PCS, standard mean difference [SMD]=0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.06 to 0.37; P=0.005) and reduced quality of life pain (SMD=−0.16; 95% CI=−0.31 to 0; P=0.04), but showed no obvious impact on quality of life mental score (MCS, SMD=0; 95% CI=−0.28 to 0.28; P=0.98), time of return to work (SMD=−0.78; 95% CI=−2.71 to 1.14; P=0.43), or the scores of work ability (SMD=−0.01; 95% CI=−0.16 to 9.09; P=0.13) and work limitation (SMD=0.12; 95% CI=−0.16 to 0.40; P=0.41).

Conclusions Work-related support rehabilitation may be effective to improve the quality of life of cancer patients.

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund und Ziel Die Wirksamkeit der berufsbezogenen unterstützenden Rehabilitation für Krebspatienten ist nach wie vor umstritten. Wir erstellten einen systematischen Review mit Metaanalyse, um den Einfluss der berufsbezogenen unterstützenden Rehabilitation auf die Lebensqualität von Krebspatienten zu untersuchen.

Methodik Wir führten eine Suche in den Datenbanken Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Ebsco und Cochrane Library nach bis August 2021 erschienenen randomisierten kontrollierten Studien (RCTs) durch, die sich mit der Wirkung der berufsbezogenen unterstützenden Rehabilitation auf die Lebensqualität von Krebspatienten befassen. Die Metaanalyse erfolgte unter Nutzung eines Random Effects-Modells.

Ergebnisse Vier RCTs wurden in die Metaanalyse einbezogen. Insgesamt ging die berufsbezogene Unterstützung von Krebspatienten im Vergleich zur Regelversorgung mit deutlich besseren PCS-Scores [physische Lebensqualität] (standardisierte Mittelwertdifferenz [SMD]=0,22; 95-%-KI, 0,06–0,37; P=0,005) und verminderten Lebensqualität-Schmerz-Scores (SMD=−0,16; 95-%-KI, −0.31–0; P=0,04) einher, zeigte aber keinen klar erkennbaren Einfluss auf die MCS-Scores (psychische Lebensqualität] (SMD=0; 95-%-KI, −0,28–0,28; P=0,98), den Zeitpunkt der Rückkehr an den Arbeitsplatz (SMD=−0,78; 95-%-KI, −2,71–1,14; P=0,43) oder die Arbeitsfähigkeits-Scores (SMD=−0,01; 95-%-KI, −0,16–9,09; P=0,13) und die Arbeitseinschränkung (SMD=0,12; 95-%-KI, −0,16–0,40; P=0,41).

Schlussfolgerung Die berufsbezogene unterstützende Rehabilitation ist möglicherweise eine wirksame Maßnahme zur Verbesserung der Lebensqualität von Krebspatienten.

Key words

cancer - quality of life - work-related support rehabilitation - randomized controlled trials - meta-analysis

Schlüsselwörter

Bewegungstherapie - funktionelle Behandlung - physikalische Therapien


Publication History

Received: 05 January 2022

Accepted: 03 January 2023

Article published online:
09 February 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Seifart U, Schmielau J. Return to Work of Cancer Survivors. Oncology research and treatment 40 2017; 760-763
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Islam T, Dahlui M, Majid HA.. et al. Factors associated with return to work of breast cancer survivors: a systematic review. BMC public health 14 Suppl 3(Suppl 3) 2014; S8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 de Boer AG, Taskila TK, Tamminga SJ.. et al. Interventions to enhance return-to-work for cancer patients. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2015 9 2015; Cd007569
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Berger AM, Mooney K, Alvarez-Perez A.. et al. Cancer-Related Fatigue, Version 2.2015. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN 13 2015; 1012-1039
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Weis J.. Cancer-related fatigue: prevalence, assessment and treatment strategies. Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research 11 2011; 441-446
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Duijts SF, van Egmond MP, Spelten E.. et al. Physical and psychosocial problems in cancer survivors beyond return to work: a systematic review. Psycho-oncology 23 2014; 481-492
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Wells M, Williams B, Firnigl D.. et al. Supporting 'work-related goals' rather than 'return to work' after cancer? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of 25 qualitative studies. Psycho-oncology 22 2013; 1208-1219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Rasmussen DM, Elverdam B.. The meaning of work and working life after cancer: an interview study. Psycho-oncology 17 2008; 1232-1238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Duijts SFA, van Egmond MP, Gits M.. et al. Cancer survivors' perspectives and experiences regarding behavioral determinants of return to work and continuation of work. Disability and rehabilitation 39 2017; 2164-2172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Kale HP, Carroll NV.. Self-reported financial burden of cancer care and its effect on physical and mental health-related quality of life among US cancer survivors. Cancer 122 2016; 283-289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 de Boer AG, Bruinvels DJ, Tytgat KM.. et al. Employment status and work-related problems of gastrointestinal cancer patients at diagnosis: a cross-sectional study. BMJ open 1 2011; e000190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Zaman AG, Tytgat KM, Klinkenbijl JH.. et al. Design of a multicentre randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a tailored clinical support intervention to enhance return to work for gastrointestinal cancer patients. BMC cancer 16 2016; 303
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Leensen MCJ, Groeneveld IF, Rejda T.. et al. Feasibility of a multidisciplinary intervention to help cancer patients return to work. European journal of cancer care 27 2018; e12690
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Stapelfeldt CM, Labriola M, Jensen AB.. et al. Municipal return to work management in cancer survivors undergoing cancer treatment: a protocol on a controlled intervention study. BMC public health 15 2015; 720
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Zaman A, Tytgat K, Klinkenbijl JHG.. et al. Effectiveness of a Tailored Work-Related Support Intervention for Patients Diagnosed with Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of occupational rehabilitation 31 2021; 323-338
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Tamminga SJ, Verbeek J, Bos M.. et al. Two-Year Follow-Up of a Multi-centre Randomized Controlled Trial to Study Effectiveness of a Hospital-Based Work Support Intervention for Cancer Patients. Journal of occupational rehabilitation 29 2019; 701-710
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Grunfeld EA, Schumacher L, Armaou M.. et al. Feasibility randomised controlled trial of a guided workbook intervention to support work-related goals among cancer survivors in the UK. BMJ open 9 2019; e022746
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J.. et al. Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Journal of clinical epidemiology 62 2009; 1006-1012
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 He B, Zhao J-Q, Zhang M-Z.. et al. Zoledronic acid and fracture risk: a meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 25 2021; 1564-1573
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D.. et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?. Controlled Clinical Trials 17 1996; 1-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C.. Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses. Annals of Internal Medicine 135 2001; 982-989
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Higgins JP, Thompson SG.. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in medicine 21 2002; 1539-1558
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Fauser D, Wienert J, Zomorodbakhsch B.. et al. Work-Related Medical Rehabilitation in Cancer: A Cluster-Randomized Multicenter Study. Deutsches Arzteblatt international 116(35-36) 2019; 592-599
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Kolator M, Kolator P, Zatoński T.. Assessment of quality of life in patients with laryngeal cancer: A review of articles. Advances in clinical and experimental medicine : official organ Wroclaw Medical University 27 2018; 711-715
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Hamer J, McDonald R, Zhang L.. et al. Quality of life (QOL) and symptom burden (SB) in patients with breast cancer. Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer 25 2017; 409-419
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Chou YJ, Kuo HJ, Shun SC.. Cancer Prehabilitation Programs and Their Effects on Quality of Life. Oncology nursing forum 45 2018; 726-736
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Abdulah DM, Abdulla BMO.. Effectiveness of group art therapy on quality of life in paediatric patients with cancer: A randomized controlled trial. Complementary therapies in medicine 41 2018; 180-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Aass N, Fosså SD, Dahl AA.. et al. Prevalence of anxiety and depression in cancer patients seen at the Norwegian Radium Hospital, European journal of cancer. Oxford, England : 1990 33 1997; 1597-1604
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Cascella M, Di Napoli R, Carbone D.. et al. Chemotherapy-related cognitive impairment: mechanisms, clinical features and research perspectives. Recenti progressi in medicina 109 2018; 523-530
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Schmidt ME, Scherer S, Wiskemann J.. et al. Return to work after breast cancer: The role of treatment-related side effects and potential impact on quality of life. European journal of cancer care 28 2019; e13051
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Davis JA, Robinson RL, Le TK.. et al. Incidence and impact of pain conditions and comorbid illnesses. Journal of pain research 4 2011; 331-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Lewandowska A, Rudzki G, Lewandowski T.. et al. Quality of Life of Cancer Patients Treated with Chemotherapy. International journal of environmental research and public health. 17. 2020
    PubMedGoogle Scholar