ObjectiveOur study examines the financial cost of lymphedema following a diagnosis of breast cancer and addresses a significant knowledge gap regarding the additional impact of lymphedema on breast cancer survivors.MethodsAn online national survey was conducted with 361 women who had either breast cancer without lymphedema (BC) (group 1, n = 209) or breast cancer with lymphedema (BC+LE) (group 2, n = 152). Participant recruitment was supported by the Breast Cancer Network Australia and the Australasian Lymphology Association.ResultsBoth breast cancer and lymphedema result in significant out‐of‐pocket financial costs borne by women. Of patients with BC+LE, 80% indicated that their breast cancer diagnosis had affected them financially compared with 67% in the BC group (P < .020). For patients with lymphedema, over half (56%) indicated that this specific additional diagnosis to their breast cancer affected them financially and that costs increased with lymphedema severity. The cost of compression garments formed a large proportion of these costs (40.1%). The average number of attendances to a therapist each year was 5.8 (range, 0‐45). Twenty‐five patients (16.4%) had an episode of cellulitis in the past year. The incidence of cellulitis was 7.7% in 91 patients with subclinical or mild lymphedema compared with 29.5% of 61 patients with more extensive lymphedema (P < .001). The average out‐of‐pocket financial cost of lymphedema care borne by women was A$977 per annum, ranging from A$207 for subclinical lymphedema to over A$1400 for moderate or severe lymphedema.ConclusionsThis study identifies an additional detrimental effect of lymphedema on women in terms of financial costs.

PurposeOur study examines the impact of breast cancer-related lymphedema on women’s work and career. Our research addresses a significant knowledge gap regarding the additional impact of lymphedema on breast cancer survivors.MethodsAn online national survey was conducted with 361 women who either had breast cancer without lymphedema (Group 1, n = 209) or breast cancer with lymphedema (Group 2, n = 152). Participant recruitment was supported by the Breast Cancer Network Australia and the Australasian Lymphology Association.ResultsBoth breast cancer and lymphedema had a significant negative influence on women’s work and career. Respondents reported changes in employment resulting from stress and/or physical impairment, which affected attendance and work performance. The perceived negative impact of breast cancer on respondents’ work and career was noticeably greater in Group 2 (63 %) than Group 1 (51 %) (p = 0.03). Of the participants who were in paid employment at some time (either at diagnosis of lymphedema or at the time of the survey (n = 103), 43 (42 %) indicated that lymphedema impacted their work performance. The impact of lymphedema on work was incremental with increased severity of lymphedema (range 22–75 %). The annual number of days off work for subclinical/mild lymphedema participants was 1.4 versus 8.1 days for moderate or severe participants (p = 0.003).ConclusionsThis study identifies an additional detrimental effect of lymphedema on women’s work and career over and above the initial impact of breast cancer and provides empirical evidence for future prospective studies and policy improvement.

This paper aims to provide a better understanding of multistakeholder perceptions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in connection with mining industry impacts. While there is significant research about CSR, there is a lack of understanding in the area of specific stakeholders' perceptions within the extractive industry, particularly in a developing country like Chile. The findings reveal that stakeholders perceive mining impacts on social and environmental domains negatively in contrast to a positive perception about economic impacts. CSR is addressed in terms of social and environmental responsibilities, but is also perceived negatively as mere rhetoric, or simply as a marketing campaign. These perceptions reflect an anti-trade-off sentiment, revealing that CSR cannot be used as a tool to compensate negative mining impacts.

No abstract

No abstract