The experience of returning to work following cancer is a largely unknown area of cancer research. This preliminary study aimed to explore the factors that influence decisions about return to work either during or after cancer treatment and to identify the important aspects of returning to work. Qualitative data were collected using individual interviews (n = 19) and two focus groups (n = 4, n = 6), predominantly with breast cancer survivors. Patterns of returning to work were diverse and a variety of reasons influenced work decisions, including financial concerns and regaining normality. Participants also discussed their ability to work, health professionals' advice, side effects, support and adjustments, and attitudes towards work. Although the majority adapted well, a few encountered difficulties on their return. It is evident that more advice is required from health professionals about returning to work, along with reasonable support and adjustments from employers to ensure that cancer survivors are able to successfully reintegrate back into the workforce.

Objectives To evaluate the impact of a multicomponent intervention (Stand More AT (SMArT) Work) designed to reduce sitting time on short (three months), medium (six months), and longer term (12 months) changes in occupational, daily, and prolonged sitting, standing, and physical activity, and physical, psychological, and work related health. Design Cluster two arm randomised controlled trial. Setting National Health Service trust, England. Participants 37 office clusters (146 participants) of desk based workers: 19 clusters (77 participants) were randomised to the intervention and 18 (69 participants) to control. Interventions The intervention group received a height adjustable workstation, a brief seminar with supporting leaflet, workstation instructions with sitting and standing targets, feedback on sitting and physical activity at three time points, posters, action planning and goal setting booklet, self monitoring and prompt tool, and coaching sessions (month 1 and every three months thereafter). The control group continued with usual practice. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was occupational sitting time (thigh worn accelerometer). Secondary outcomes were objectively measured daily sitting, prolonged sitting (≥30 minutes), and standing time, physical activity, musculoskeletal problems, self reported work related health (job performance, job satisfaction, work engagement, occupational fatigue, sickness presenteeism, and sickness absenteeism), cognitive function, and self reported psychological measures (mood and affective states, quality of life) assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months. Data were analysed using generalised estimating equation models, accounting for clustering. Results A significant difference between groups (in favour of the intervention group) was found in occupational sitting time at 12 months (−83.28 min/workday, 95% confidence interval −116.57 to −49.98, P=0.001). Differences between groups (in favour of the intervention group compared with control) were observed for occupational sitting time at three months (−50.62 min/workday, −78.71 to −22.54, P<0.001) and six months (−64.40 min/workday, −97.31 to −31.50, P<0.001) and daily sitting time at six months (−59.32 min/day, −88.40 to −30.25, P<0.001) and 12 months (−82.39 min/day, −114.54 to −50.26, P=0.001). Group differences (in favour of the intervention group compared with control) were found for prolonged sitting time, standing time, job performance, work engagement, occupational fatigue, sickness presenteeism, daily anxiety, and quality of life. No differences were seen for sickness absenteeism. Conclusions SMArT Work successfully reduced sitting time over the short, medium, and longer term, and positive changes were observed in work related and psychological health. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10967042.

Transformational leaders employ a visionary and creative style of leadership that inspires employees to make independent decisions and develop in their work. There is some evidence that the transformational (inspirational) leadership style is linked to employee burnout and stress. However, little research has focused on the psychological mechanisms that could explain this link, nor has there been a focus on positive affective well-being. We propose that transformational leaders influence their followers' self-efficacy, thereby affecting affective well-being in followers. This study extends previous work by examining the direct link between leadership and well-being both cross-sectionally (N=447) and longitudinally (N=188), and testing the mediating effects of self-efficacy. The study was carried out within parts of an elderly care department in a Danish local government. A theory-driven model of the relationships between leadership, self-efficacy and affective well-being was tested using Structural Equation Modelling. The results indicated that followers' self-ratings of self-efficacy mediated the relationship between transformational leadership style and positive affective well-being. Only limited evidence for a direct path between leadership behaviour and positive affective well-being was found. These findings have implications for how organizations may promote employee well-being, through interventions directed at supporting transformational leadership behaviours.