Rehabilitation and return to work after cancer — instruments and practices

The ‘Rehabilitation and return to work after cancer — instruments and practices’ project provides an insight into the issues surrounding rehabilitation and return to work (RTW) after a cancer diagnosis and the problems encountered by workers affected by cancer and their employers. Furthermore, the report presents recommendations for instruments, practices, policies and interventions to successfully support the RTW of workers affected by cancer. Each year, an estimated 3.4 million new cases of cancer are diagnosed in Europe. About half of the people diagnosed with cancer are of working age. Although cancer occurrence differs from one region to another in Europe, the most frequent forms of cancer are breast, colorectal, prostate and lung cancer. These types of cancer were estimated to account for over half of the overall burden of cancer in Europe in 2012. The impact of cancer on a person’s daily life is immediate and striking. The diagnosis usually results in long periods of sickness absence because of medical treatments and functional restrictions. Although, in general, cancer management has improved over the past three decades and the overall number of people who survive cancer is increasing, many cancer survivors still face long-term symptoms and impairments after their treatment ends, such as fatigue. These symptoms and impairments can affect the workability of cancer survivors, making it more difficult to remain in or re-enter the job market. Research shows that most cancer survivors are able to remain in or return to work, but that overall the risk of unemployment among cancer survivors is 1.4 times higher than among people who have never been diagnosed with cancer. Optimising the rehabilitation and RTW of workers affected by cancer is therefore important to both improve the well-being of this vulnerable group and reduce the societal and financial impacts of cancer on European enterprises and society at large. Instruments, practices, policies and interventions aimed at the promotion of rehabilitation and RTW are clearly important. This ‘Rehabilitation and return to work after cancer — instruments and practices’ project reports on the emerging issue of rehabilitation and RTW after cancer and provides national examples of successful instruments, practices, policies and interventions to prevent long-term sickness absences and unemployment. The project is divided into the following main tasks: a literature review on rehabilitation and RTW after a cancer diagnosis; detailed descriptions of instruments, practices, policies and interventions to support rehabilitation and RTW after a cancer diagnosis; company case studies; qualitative research with experts and intermediaries; support for the EU-OSHA stakeholder seminar

Parents' actions, challenges, and needs while enabling participation of children with a physical disability: a scoping review

Contains fulltext : 108967.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Pediatric rehabilitation considers Family-centered service (FCS) as a way to increase participation of children with a physical disability in daily life. An important principal is that parents greatly contribute to their child's participation at school, at home, and in the community. However, it is unclear what kind of information is available from literature about what parents actually do to support their child's participation and what problems and needs they experience? Hence, the aim of this study was to provide an overview of the actions, challenges, and needs of parents in enabling participation of their child with a physical disability that is neurological and non-progressive in nature. METHODS: Scoping review with extensive literature search (September 2011) and a thematic analysis to synthesize findings. RESULTS: Fourteen relevant articles revealed two major themes: 'parents enable and support performance of meaningful activities' and 'parents enable, change and use the environment'. Each theme holds a number of actions (e.g. choosing the right type of meaningful activities for facilitating social contacts) and challenges (e.g. negative attitudes of other people). Less information is available about the needs of parents. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that parents apply a broad range of strategies to support participation of their children. They experience many challenges, especially as a result of constraints in the social and physical environments. However, this review also shows that little is known about needs of parents in facilitating participation. As Family-centered service (FCS) philosophy is all about the needs of the child and the family, it is essential to further investigate the needs of the parents and to understand if and to what extent they wish to be supported in enabling their child's participation in daily life