64 resultados para Psycho-oncology
Resumo:
Background: The majority of women (71%) who undergo BRCA1/2 testing—designed to identify genetic mutations associated with increased risk of cancer—receive results that are termed ‘ambiguous’ or ‘uninformative negative’. How women interpret these results and the association with numerical ability was examined. Methods: In this study, 477 women at increased risk for breast and ovarian cancer were recruited via the Cancer Genetics Network. They were presented with information about the four different possible BRCA1/2 test results—positive, true negative, ambiguous and uninformative negative—and asked to indicate which of six options represents the best response. Participants were then asked which treatment options they thought a woman receiving the results should discuss with her doctor. Finally, participants completed measures of objective and subjective numeracy. Results: Almost all of the participants correctly interpreted the positive and negative BRCA1/2 genetic test results. However, they encountered difficulties interpreting the uninformative and ambiguous BRCA1/2 genetic test results. Participants were almost equally likely to think either that the woman had learned nothing from the test result or that she was as likely to develop cancer as the average woman. Highly numerate participants were more likely to correctly interpret inconclusive test results (ambiguous, OR = 1.62; 95% CI [1.28, 2.07]; p < 0.001; uninformative, OR = 1.40; 95% CI [1.10, 1.80]). Discussion: Given the medical and psychological ramifications of genetic testing, healthcare professionals should consider devoting extra effort to ensuring proper comprehension of ambiguous and uninformative negative test results by women. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Resumo:
Objective: Cancer may impact negatively on an informal caregiver's health long after treatment has ended. This review identifies the self-report measures currently in use to measure caregivers need for support and determines their scientific soundness and clinical utility.
Method: A systematic electronic database search of Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO, BNI ProQuest was conducted. The psychometric properties and clinical utility of needs assessment tools for caregivers of cancer survivors (excluding advanced disease) were extracted and summarised.
Results: Seven cancer survivor caregiver needs assessment tools were identified. Data on instrument development was well reported, although variability was noted in their structure and content. The majority demonstrated some degree of reliability and validity; only two were evaluated for test–retest reliability (CaSPUN and SPUNS) with only the SPUNS showing a high degree of reliability over time. The Health Care Needs Survey (HCNS), Needs Assessment of Family Caregivers-Cancer (NAFC-C) and Cancer Caregiving Tasks Consequences and Needs Questionnaire (CaTCoN) have been validated at various stages of the cancer continuum. Minimal data was available on responsiveness.
Conclusion: All assessment tools identified require further psychometric analysis. For research purposes, the use of the SPUNS (with its acceptable test–retest reliability) appears most appropriate; although its length may be of concern for clinical use; therefore, the shorter SCNS-P&C is likely to be more suitable for use clinically. At present, the NAFC-C demonstrates a great potential in both the research and clinical environments; however, it requires further psychometric testing before it can be fully recommended. Further analysis is necessary on ideal response formats and the meaning of a total needs score.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: Cancer survivors (CSs) are at risk of developing late effects (LEs) associated with the disease and its treatment. This paper compares the health status, care needs and use of health services by CSs with LEs and CSs without LEs.
METHODS: Cancer survivors (n = 613) were identified via the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry and invited to participate in a postal survey that was administered by their general practitioner. The survey assessed self-reported LEs, health status, health service use and unmet care needs. A total of 289 (47%) CSs responded to the survey, and 93% of respondents completed a LEs scale.
RESULTS: Forty-one per cent (111/269) of CSs reported LEs. Survivors without LEs and survivors with LEs were comparable in terms of age and gender. The LEs group reported a significantly greater number of co-morbidities, lower physical health and mental health scores, greater overall health service use and more unmet needs. Unadjusted logistic regression analysis found that cancer site, time since diagnosis and treatment were significantly associated with reporting of LEs. CSs who received combination therapies compared with CSs who received single treatments were over two and a half times more likely to report LEs (OR = 2.63, 95% CI = 1.32-5.25) after controlling for all other variables.
CONCLUSIONS: The CS population with LEs comprises a particularly vulnerable group of survivors who have multiple health care problems and needs and who require tailored care plans that take account of LEs and their impact on health-related quality of life.
Resumo:
Title
Psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life and emotional wellbeing for recently diagnosed cancer patients.
Background
Despite clear guidelines recommending the provision of emotional support for cancer patients, we do not know how best to address psychological distress in this group.
Aim
To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life (QoL) and general psychological distress newly diagnosed cancer patients.
Methods
We searched electronic sources for RCTs of psychosocial interventions or ‘talking therapies’ with individual newly diagnosed cancer patients. Only trials measuring QoL and general psychological distress were included. Meta-analyses examined subgroups by outcome measurement, mode of delivery and discipline of trained helper.
Results
Thirty trials met the criteria. No significant effects were observed for QoL at 6-months (SMD 0.11; 95% CI -0.00 to 0.22) except when using cancer-specific measures (SMD 0.16; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.30). Sub-group analyses revealed that psycho-educational, nurse-delivered interventions improved QoL (SMD 0.23; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.43). General psychological distress as assessed by ‘mood measures’ improved (SMD - 0.81; 95% CI -1.44 to -0.18), but heterogeneity was a factor.
Discussion and conclusion
Psychosocial interventions vary in format and content, raising concerns about heterogeneity, despite appearing to have a beneficial impact on cancer-specific QoL and mood. Future research should concentrate on screening for emotional support needs and identifying common elements within interventions that are of value. Authors should carefully select outcome measures that are appropriately sensitive to change.
Resumo:
Title
Psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life and emotional wellbeing for recently diagnosed cancer patients.
Background
Despite clear guidelines recommending the provision of emotional support for cancer patients, we do not know how best to address psychological distress in this group.
Aim
To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life (QoL) and general psychological distress newly diagnosed cancer patients.
Methods
We searched electronic sources for RCTs of psychosocial interventions or ‘talking therapies’ with individual newly diagnosed cancer patients. Only trials measuring QoL and general psychological distress were included. Meta-analyses examined subgroups by outcome measurement, mode of delivery and discipline of trained helper.
Results
Thirty trials met the criteria. No significant effects were observed for QoL at 6-months (SMD 0.11; 95% CI -0.00 to 0.22) except when using cancer-specific measures (SMD 0.16; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.30). Sub-group analyses revealed that psycho-educational, nurse-delivered interventions improved QoL (SMD 0.23; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.43). General psychological distress as assessed by ‘mood measures’ improved (SMD - 0.81; 95% CI -1.44 to -0.18), but heterogeneity was a factor.
Discussion and conclusion
Psychosocial interventions vary in format and content, raising concerns about heterogeneity, despite appearing to have a beneficial impact on cancer-specific QoL and mood. Future research should concentrate on screening for emotional support needs and identifying common elements within interventions that are of value. Authors should carefully select outcome measures that are appropriately sensitive to change.
Resumo:
Objective: This study provides a longitudinal assessment of distress in longer-term oesophageal cancer carers, while examining illness perception schema as a possible determinant of change in distress over time.
Methods: Oesophageal cancer carers (n=171), 48-months post-diagnosis, were assessed at baseline and 12-months later with the Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised, Cancer Coping Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Concerns About Recurrence Scale.
Results: Findings report deterioration from normal to probable anxiety in 35.7% of carers and probable depression in 28.7% carers over time. Fear of recurrence remained stable. Changes in control, consequence and cause beliefs were identified as key determinants of a change in psychological morbidity.
Conclusions: Illness beliefs appear to be valuable targets for psychological intervention to improve wellbeing among carers of people with oesophageal cancer.
Resumo:
Objectives: To summarise black and minority ethnic (BME) patients' and partners
experiences of prostate cancer (PCa) by examining the findings of existing qualitative studies
Methods:
We undertook a systematic metasynthesis of qualitative studies using a modified version of
Noblit and Hare's 'meta-ethnography' approach, with a 2000-2015 search of seven databases.
Results: Thirteen studies of men from US and UK BME groups were included. We explored
constructs with BME-specific features. Healthcare provider relationships, formation of a
spiritual alliance with God (which enhanced the participants’ feeling of empowerment and
ability to cope with the cancer) and living on for others (generally to increase cancer
awareness), often connected to spiritual regrowth, were the three constructs most commonly
reported. A magnified effect from erectile dysfunction was also common. Initially this
affected men’s disclosure to others about their cancer and their sexual problems, but
eventually men responded by shifting their conceptualisations of masculinity to sustain self
and social identities. There was also evidence of inequality resulting from financial
constraints and adversity that necessitated resilience in coping.
Conclusions: The prostate cancer experience of BME men and their partners is affected by a
complex intersection of ethnicity with other factors. Healthcare services should acknowledge
this. If providers recognise the men’s felt masculinities, social identities and spiritual beliefs
and their shifting nature, services could be improved, with community as well as individual
benefits. More studies are needed in diverse ethnic groups
