Skip to main content

Table 6 OHC professionals’, re-integration coaches’ and job hunting officers’ satisfaction with the tailored RTW program

From: Offering a tailored return to work program to cancer survivors with job loss: a process evaluation

Topics

OHC professionals (N=68)a

Re-integration coaches (N=52)a

Job hunting officers (N=48)a

Satisfaction (score range 1–5)b

Mean (SD)

Mean (SD)

Mean (SD)

 To what extent are you satisfied with:

  -Protocol for delivering the program

N/A

3.8 (0.4)

3.7 (0.8)

  -Instructions from my own organization

N/A

4.4 (0.5)

4.0 (0.5)

  -Options to deviate within the program protocol

N/A

3.9 (0.6)

3.7 (1.0)

  -Options for tailoring the program to participants’ needs

N/A

3.5 (0.7)

N/A

  -Communication with a contact person within your organization

N/A

4.0 (0.6)

3.7 (0.6)

  -Communication with the researchers

N/A

3.6 (0.5)

3.6 (0.7)

  -Communication with the OHC professionals during the program

N/A

3.0 (0.8)

3.1 (0.8)

  -Transfer from the re-integration coach to the job hunting officers

N/A

3.7 (1.1)

3.8 (0.6)

  -Communication with the job hunting officers

N/A

3.3 (1.3)

N/A

  -Communication with the re-integration coach

N/A

N/A

3.8 (0.5)

  - Program completion and final contact with the participant

N/A

4.3 (0.6)

3.6 (0.8)

  -General information about the program through the SSA

3.7 (1.0)

N/A

N/A

  -Information about your patient participating in the program

3.6 (0.9)

N/A

N/A

  -Opportunities to deliberate with the researchers

3.4 (0.8)

N/A

N/A

  -Information regarding the content of your patients’ program

3.5 (0.9)

N/A

N/A

  -Opportunities to deliberate with the re-integration coach

3.2 (1.0)

N/A

N/A

  -Final report from the re-integration coach

3.5 (1.1)

N/A

N/A

  -Information about your patients’ transfer to job hunting agencies

3.3 (1.0)

N/A

N/A

  -Opportunities to deliberate with the job hunting officers

3.2 (1.0)

N/A

N/A

  -Final report from the job hunting officers

3.4 (1.0)

N/A

N/A

Overall satisfaction score

3.4 (0.2)

3.8 (0.4)

3.7 (0.2)

Experience statements (score range 1–5)c

Mean (SD)

Mean (SD)

Mean (SD)

  -The program fit well into my organization

3.7 (0.8)

4.5 (0.6)

4.4 (0.7)

  -Before the program started, the program objective was clear to me

3.3 (1.0)

4.6 (0.5)

4.4 (0.6)

  -Delivering the program was similar to my usual job demands

N/A

4.5 (0.6)

4.1 (1.0)

  -Cooperating with the program agreed with my usual work tasks

3.7 (0.7)

N/A

N/A

  -Before the program started, I was excited about it

N/A

4.7 (0.5)

4.6 (0.5)

  -It was easy to follow the program protocol

N/A

3.9 (0.7)

3.5 (1.1)

  -In hindsight, it was useful for me to participate in the program

N/A

4.2 (0.8)

4.2 (0.6)

  -I was able to deliver my usual care alongside the program

3.6 (0.8)

N/A

N/A

  -In the future, I would work with such a program again

3.8 (0.8)

4.6 (0.6)

4.5 (0.7)

Overall experience score

3.6 (0.2)

4.4 (0.3)

4.2 (0.4)

Time consumption of the program

N (%)

N (%)

N (%)

 Delivering, or cooperating with, the program took up extra work time:

  -Yes and I did mind that

7 (10.3)

3 (5.8)

1 (2.1)

  -Yes but I did not mind that

12 (17.6)

41 (78.8)

45 (93.8)

  -Neutral

17 (25.0)

9 (15.4)

1 (2.1)

  -No

29 (42.6)

0 (0.0)

1 (2.1)

  1. aOne process evaluation questionnaire was completed per participant, therefore, the N per group of professionals reflects the number of times a questionnaire was completed by a professional from that group. Also, due to missing values or rounding differences, N and percentages may approach or exceed the total N or 100 %; bA higher score reflects a higher level of satisfaction; cA higher score reflects a higher level of agreement with the statement