Resources search

Purpose: To explore work related and personal facilitators and barriers for return to work (RTW) and stay at work after stroke.

Materials and methods: Twenty individuals post-stroke (median age 52 years; seven women) were inter- viewed in focus groups. Data were analyzed by using qualitative content analysis.

Results: An overall theme “Work conditions, support and changed personal priorities influenced RTW and stay at work after stroke” emerged and covered three categories: “Adjustments and flexibility at the work place facilitated RTW and a sustainable work situation”, “Psychosocial support and knowledge about stroke consequences facilitated work and reduced stress”, and “Changed view of work and other personal priorities”. Physical adjustments at the work place and flexibility in the work schedule were perceived facilitators. Support from family and colleagues were important, whereas lack of knowledge of stroke dis- abilities at the work place was perceived a barrier. Also changed personal priorities in relation to the work and the current life situation influenced RTW in various ways.

Conclusions: The individual’s opportunities to influence the work situation is a key factor for RTW and the ability to stay at work after stroke. Adjustments, flexibility, support, knowledge of stroke, and receptiv- ity to a changed view of work are important for a sustainable work situation.

Background: Access to healthcare contributes to the attainment of health and is a fundamental human right. People with disabilities are believed to experience widespread poor access to healthcare services, due to inaccessible environments and discriminatory belief systems and attitudes. Qualitative data on these bar- riers has not previously been systematically reviewed. A meta-synthesis was undertaken of qualitative studies exploring the barriers to primary healthcare services experienced by people with disabilities in low- and mid- dle-income countries.

Methods: Six electronic databases were searched for relevant studies from 2000 to 2019. Forty-one eli- gible studies were identified.

Results: Findings suggest that the people with disabilities’ choice to seek healthcare services or not, as well as the quality of intervention provided by primary healthcare providers, are influenced by three types of barriers: cultural beliefs or attitudinal barriers, informational barriers, and practical or logis- tical barriers.

Conclusion: In order to achieve full health coverage at acceptable quality for people with disabilities, it is necessary not only to consider the different barriers, but also their combined effect on people with dis- abilities and their households. It is only then that more nuanced and effective interventions to improve access to primary healthcare, systematically addressing barriers, can be designed and implemented.

Purpose: To qualitatively investigate changes in employment status, barriers to and facilitators of (return to) work in breast cancer survivors 5–10 years after diagnosis.

Materials and methods: Women were eligible to participate in the focus groups if they were younger than 55 years and were employed at time of diagnosis. Data were analysed by two independent researchers using thematic content analysis.

Results: Nineteen women participated in three semi-structured focus groups, of whom 18 reported a change in employment status 5–10 years after diagnosis. Perceived barriers to (return to) work shortly after breast cancer diagnosis tended to be disease- and treatment-related, while 5–10 years later, they were personal- and work-related. Participants recommended open communication and support at the workplace, and comprehensive information from (occupational) health care professionals to facilitate dealing with breast cancer at work.

Conclusions: Breast cancer survivors still experience changes in employment status 5–10 years after diagnosis. (Occupational) health care professionals should be alert that perceived barriers for returning to work change over time. Future research should focus on increasing awareness (at work) of breast cancer survivors’ needs, providing adequate information and support to all involved, and developing interventions to sustain survivors’ work ability at the long term.

Background: The optimal management strategy for multiple sclerosis (MS), and many other chronic diseases, likely involves health behavior modification. Multimodal behavioral interventions may be most effective, but little is known about long-term adherence in people with MS.

Methods: This qualitative study assessed barriers and enablers to long-term adherence by people with MS who self-selected for a 5-day health behavior intervention 3–5 years prior. Thirteen women and five men participated in semi-structured phone interviews, which were transcribed and thematically analyzed.

Results: The experience was described as useful for information gathering, decision making, and practical strategies regarding health behaviors. The majority still followed supplementation and dietary recommendations most of the time, although consuming non-recommended food while eating out was common. Support at home, ability and enjoyment in food preparation, and ability to resist unhealthy foods were both barriers and enablers. Adherence to “time-consuming” exercise and meditation recommendations were less common and episodic. Many reported competing interests on time from work and family; and barriers including injuries and symptoms, weather, financial or geographical barriers, and lack of person-centred support and motivation. Increased fitness and mobility, weight loss, and a sense of accomplishment and control were advantages and motivators. Practical and attitudinal strategies employed included planning, tailoring activities to ability and preference, and self-monitoring.

Conclusion: While most people attempted to engage with all components of the intervention initially, only some still engaged with all components, and none to the recommended levels. These data can inform future quantitative studies and health behavior interventions.

Background: Persons with disabilities have often been overlooked in the context of HIV and AIDS risk prevention and service provision. This paper explores access to and use of HIV information and services among persons with disabilities.

Methods: We conducted a multi-country qualitative research study at urban and rural sites in Uganda, Zambia, and Ghana: three countries selected to exemplify different stages of the HIV response to persons with disabilities. We conducted key informant interviews with government officials and service providers, and focus group discussions with persons with disabilities and caregivers. Research methods were designed to promote active, meaningful participation from persons with disabilities, under the guidance of local stakeholder advisors.

Results: Persons with disabilities emphatically challenged the common assumption that persons with disabilities are not sexually active, pointing out that this assumption denies their rights and – by denying their circumstances – leaves them vulnerable to abuse. Among persons with disabilities, knowledge about HIV was limited and attitudes towards HIV services were frequently based upon misinformation and stigmatising cultural beliefs; associated with illiteracy especially in rural areas, and rendering people with intellectual and developmental disability especially vulnerable. Multiple overlapping layers of stigma towards persons with disabilities (including internalised self-stigma and stigma associated with gender and abuse) have compounded each other to contribute to social isolation and impediments to accessing HIV information and services. Participants suggested approaches to HIV education outreach that emphasise the importance of sharing responsibility, promoting peer leadership, and increasing the active, visible participation of persons with disabilities in intervention activities, in order to make sure that accurate information reflecting the vulnerabilities of persons with disabilities is accessible to people of all levels of education. Fundamental change to improve the skills and attitudes of healthcare providers and raise their sensitivity towards persons with disabilities (including recognising multiple layers of stigma) will be critical to the ability of HIV service organisations to implement programs that are accessible to and inclusive of persons with disabilities.

Discussion: We suggest practical steps towards improving HIV service accessibility and utilisation for persons with disabilities, particularly emphasising the power of community responsibility and support; including acknowledging compounded stigma, addressing attitudinal barriers, promoting participatory responses, building political will and generating high-quality evidence to drive the continuing response.

Conclusions: HIV service providers and rehabilitation professionals alike must recognise the two-way relationship between HIV and disability, and their multiple overlapping vulnerabilities and stigmas. Persons with disabilities demand recognition through practical steps to improve HIV service accessibility and utilisation in a manner that recognises their vulnerability and facilitates retention in care and adherence to treatment. In order to promote lasting change, interventions must look beyond the service delivery context and take into account the living circumstances of individuals and communities affected by HIV and disability.