Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 15, 2025

Integrating Augmented Reality Tools in Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema Prognostication and Diagnosis
Published on: February 6, 2020
Return to work or leaving work? Differences of return to work between breast cancer patients and the general
Siegfried Geyer1, Stefanie Sperlich2, Eranda Sahiti2
1Department of Medical Sociology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30623, Hannover, Germany. geyer.siegfried@mh-hannover.de.
Purpose:
It was examined whether employment among breast cancer survivors was lower than in the general population 4 to 6 years after surgery. We also examined whether disease severity, post-surgical treatment, social, and workplace characteristics have effects on employment as primary outcome, and whether the distance from surgery to observation may determine employment.
Methods:
We performed a multicentric observational study with four survey waves. Data were collected based on mailed surveys and patient records. Patients were up to 63 years old at entry with TNM-tumour stages T0 to TIV. Comparisons with the general population were performed by drawing controls from the German Socio-Economic Panel.
Results:
N = 372 breast cancer survivors participated in all surveys (= 82.2% of the initial sample). Their rate of occupationally active women was lower than in the general population (ORpatients = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.42-0.84; p < 0.01). Among patients, tumour stage had no effects on employment 12 months after surgery; 4-6 years later, this was the case only among patients with the most unfavourable tumour stage (OR = 0.16; p = 0.01; 95% CI = 0.04-0.58). Antihormone therapy was unrelated with employment (OR = 0.80; p = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.54-1.19); inpatient rehabilitation was negatively associated at 12 months after surgery (OR = 0.47; p = 0.02; 95% CI = 0.25-0.89) and unrelated at the last survey wave (OR = 0.95; p = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.55-1.64). Compared with the lowest level of occupational autonomy, it was unrelated with employment 12 months after surgery (OR = 0.79; p = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.18-4.41), but for the highest level of autonomy, it had significant effects 4 to 6 years later (OR = 4.56; p = 0.04; 95% CI = 1.10-18.81). Effort-reward imbalance as a continuously scaled indicator of pre-surgery occupational distress was significantly associated with return to work 12 months after surgery (OR = 0.13; p < 0.01; 95% CI = 0.06-0.31), but it had no effect at the last survey wave (OR = 0.64; p = 0.31; 95% CI = 0.28-1.50). One year after surgery, education at higher levels had no significant effects on return to work (OR = 1.30; p = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.56-3.00 for the highest level compared with the lowest one), only at the last measurement marked differences by education emerged (OR = 2.23; p = 0.03; 95% CI = 1.08-4.63).
Conclusion:
Temporal distance between surgery and survey wave determines whether potentially influencing factors have effects. Disease severity and post-surgical treatment were unrelated to employment. Whether work-related and socio-demographic factors are determining employment depends on the date of measurement.
Related Concept Videos
Cancer Survival Analysis
Classification of Illness
An illness is a response to a disease in which the person's level of functioning is changed compared with a previous level. The general classification of illness includes acute and chronic.
Acute illness is severe...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Regression Toward the Mean
Longitudinal Research
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data

