Adopting a family approach to theory and practice: measuring distress in cancer patient-partner dyads with the distress thermometer

Objective: Significant others are central to patients' experience and management of their cancer illness. Building on our validation of the Distress Thermometer (DT) for family members, this investigation examines individual and collective distress in a sample of cancer patients and their matched partners, accounting for the aspects of gender and role. Method: Questionnaires including the DT were completed by a heterogeneous sample of 224 couples taking part in a multisite study. Results: Our investigation showed that male patients (34.2%), female patients (31.9%), and male partners (29.1%) exhibited very similar levels of distress, while female partners (50.5%) exhibited much higher levels of distress according to the DT. At the dyad level just over half the total sample contained at least one individual reporting significant levels of distress. Among dyads with at least one distressed person, the proportion of dyads where both individuals reported distress was greatest (23.6%). Gender and role analyses revealed that males and females were not equally distributed among the four categories of dyads (i.e. dyads with no distress; dyads where solely the patient or dyads where solely the partner is distressed; dyads where both are distressed). Conclusion: A remarkable number of dyads reported distress in one or both partners. Diverse patterns of distress within dyads suggest varying risks of psychosocial strain. Screening patients' partners in addition to patients themselves may enable earlier identification of risk settings. The support offered to either member of such dyads should account for their role- and gender-specific needs. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley ; Sons, Ltd.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections: observational study, systematic reviews and mathematical modelling

BACKGROUND Partner notification is essential to the comprehensive case management of sexually transmitted infections. Systematic reviews and mathematical modelling can be used to synthesise information about the effects of new interventions to enhance the outcomes of partner notification. OBJECTIVE To study the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs). DESIGN Secondary data analysis of clinical audit data; systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) published from 1 January 1966 to 31 August 2012 and of studies of health-related quality of life (HRQL) [MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA)] published from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2011; static models of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; and dynamic modelling studies to improve parameter estimation and examine effectiveness. SETTING General population and genitourinary medicine clinic attenders. PARTICIPANTS Heterosexual women and men. INTERVENTIONS Traditional partner notification by patient or provider referral, and new partner notification by expedited partner therapy (EPT) or its UK equivalent, accelerated partner therapy (APT). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Population prevalence; index case reinfection; and partners treated per index case. RESULTS Enhanced partner therapy reduced reinfection in index cases with curable STIs more than simple patient referral [risk ratio (RR) 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.89]. There are no randomised trials of APT. The median number of partners treated for chlamydia per index case in UK clinics was 0.60. The number of partners needed to treat to interrupt transmission of chlamydia was lower for casual than for regular partners. In dynamic model simulations, > 10% of partners are chlamydia positive with look-back periods of up to 18 months. In the presence of a chlamydia screening programme that reduces population prevalence, treatment of current partners achieves most of the additional reduction in prevalence attributable to partner notification. Dynamic model simulations show that cotesting and treatment for chlamydia and gonorrhoea reduce the prevalence of both STIs. APT has a limited additional effect on prevalence but reduces the rate of index case reinfection. Published quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) weights were of insufficient quality to be used in a cost-effectiveness study of partner notification in this project. Using an intermediate outcome of cost per infection diagnosed, doubling the efficacy of partner notification from 0.4 to 0.8 partners treated per index case was more cost-effective than increasing chlamydia screening coverage. CONCLUSIONS There is evidence to support the improved clinical effectiveness of EPT in reducing index case reinfection. In a general heterosexual population, partner notification identifies new infected cases but the impact on chlamydia prevalence is limited. Partner notification to notify casual partners might have a greater impact than for regular partners in genitourinary clinic populations. Recommendations for future research are (1) to conduct randomised controlled trials using biological outcomes of the effectiveness of APT and of methods to increase testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and STIs after APT; (2) collection of HRQL data should be a priority to determine QALYs associated with the sequelae of curable STIs; and (3) standardised parameter sets for curable STIs should be developed for mathematical models of STI transmission that are used for policy-making. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Strategies for partner notification for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV

BACKGROUND Partner notification (PN) is the process whereby sexual partners of an index patient are informed of their exposure to a sexually transmitted infection (STI) and the need to obtain treatment. For the person (index patient) with a curable STI, PN aims to eradicate infection and prevent re-infection. For sexual partners, PN aims to identify and treat undiagnosed STIs. At the level of sexual networks and populations, the aim of PN is to interrupt chains of STI transmission. For people with viral STI, PN aims to identify undiagnosed infections, which can facilitate access for their sexual partners to treatment and help prevent transmission. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of different PN strategies in people with STI, including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. SEARCH METHODS We searched electronic databases (the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE) without language restrictions. We scanned reference lists of potential studies and previous reviews and contacted experts in the field. We searched three trial registries. We conducted the most recent search on 31 August 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing two or more PN strategies. Four main PN strategies were included: patient referral, expedited partner therapy, provider referral and contract referral. Patient referral means that the patient notifies their sexual partners, either with (enhanced patient referral) or without (simple patient referral) additional verbal or written support. In expedited partner therapy, the patient delivers medication or a prescription for medication to their partner(s) without the need for a medical examination of the partner. In provider referral, health service personnel notify the partners. In contract referral, the index patient is encouraged to notify partner, with the understanding that the partners will be contacted if they do not visit the health service by a certain date. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We analysed data according to paired partner referral strategies. We organised the comparisons first according to four main PN strategies (1. enhanced patient referral, 2. expedited partner therapy, 3. contract referral, 4. provider referral). We compared each main strategy with simple patient referral and then with each other, if trials were available. For continuous outcome measures, we calculated the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For dichotomous variables, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. We performed meta-analyses where appropriate. We performed a sensitivity analysis for the primary outcome re-infection rate of the index patient by excluding studies with attrition of greater than 20%. Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS We included 26 trials (17,578 participants, 9015 women and 8563 men). Five trials were conducted in developing countries. Only two trials were conducted among HIV-positive patients. There was potential for selection bias, owing to the methods of allocation used and of performance bias, owing to the lack of blinding in most included studies. Seven trials had attrition of greater than 20%, increasing the risk of bias.The review found moderate-quality evidence that expedited partner therapy is better than simple patient referral for preventing re-infection of index patients when combining trials of STIs that caused urethritis or cervicitis (6 trials; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.89, I(2) = 39%). When studies with attrition greater than 20% were excluded, the effect of expedited partner therapy was attenuated (2 trials; RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.04, I(2) = 0%). In trials restricted to index patients with chlamydia, the effect was attenuated (2 trials; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.35, I(2) = 22%). Expedited partner therapy also increased the number of partners treated per index patient (three trials) when compared with simple patient referral in people with chlamydia or gonorrhoea (MD 0.43, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.58) or trichomonas (MD 0.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.67), and people with any STI syndrome (MD 0.5, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.67). Expedited partner therapy was not superior to enhanced patient referral in preventing re-infection (3 trials; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.53, I(2) = 33%, low-quality evidence). Home sampling kits for partners (four trials) did not result in lower rates of re-infection in the index case (measured in one trial), or higher numbers of partners elicited (three trials), notified (two trials) or treated (one trial) when compared with simple patient referral. There was no consistent evidence for the relative effects of provider, contract or other patient referral methods. In one trial among men with non-gonococcal urethritis, more partners were treated with provider referral than with simple patient referral (MD 0.5, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.63). In one study among people with syphilis, contract referral elicited treatment of more partners than provider referral (MD 2.2, 95% CI 1.95 to 2.45), but the number of partners receiving treatment was the same in both groups. Where measured, there was no statistical evidence of differences in the incidence of adverse effects between PN strategies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The evidence assessed in this review does not identify a single optimal strategy for PN for any particular STI. When combining trials of STI causing urethritis or cervicitis, expedited partner therapy was more successful than simple patient referral for preventing re-infection of the index patient but was not superior to enhanced patient referral. Expedited partner therapy interventions should include all components that were part of the trial intervention package. There was insufficient evidence to determine the most effective components of an enhanced patient referral strategy. There are too few trials to allow consistent conclusions about the relative effects of provider, contract or other patient referral methods for different STIs. More high-quality RCTs of PN strategies for HIV and syphilis, using biological outcomes, are needed.

Higher emotional distress in female partners of cancer patients: prevalence and patient-partner interdependencies in a 3-year cohort

OBJECTIVE: Assessment and treatment of psychological distress in cancer patients was recognized as a major challenge. The role of spouses, caregivers, and significant others became of salient importance not only because of their supportive functions but also in respect to their own burden. The purpose of this study was to assess the amount of distress in a mixed sample of cancer patients and their partners and to explore the dyadic interdependence. METHODS: An initial sample of 154 dyads was recruited, and distress questionnaires (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Symptom Checklist 9-Item Short Version and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey) were assessed over four time points. Linear mixed models and actor-partner interdependence models were applied. RESULTS: A significant proportion of patients and their partners (up to 40%) reported high levels of anxiety, depression, psychological distress, and low quality of life over the course of the investigation. Mixed model analyses revealed that higher risks for clinical relevant anxiety and depression in couples exist for female patients and especially for female partners. Although psychological strain decreased over time, the risk for elevated distress in female partners remained. Modeling patient-partner interdependence over time stratified by patients' gender revealed specific effects: a moderate correlation between distress in patients and partners, and a transmission of distress from male patients to their female partners. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide empirical support for gender-specific transmission of distress in dyads coping with cancer. This should be considered as an important starting point for planning systemic psycho-oncological interventions and conceptualizing further research.

Daily negative affect and smoking after a self-set quit attempt: The role of dyadic invisible social support in a daily diary study

Objectives Social support receipt from one's partner is assumed to be beneficial for successful smoking cessation. However, support receipt can have costs. Recent research suggests that the most effective support is unnoticed by the receiver (i.e., invisible). Therefore, this study examined the association between everyday levels of dyadic invisible emotional and instrumental support, daily negative affect, and daily smoking after a self-set quit attempt in smoker–non-smoker couples. Methods Overall, 100 smokers (72.0% men, mean age M = 40.48, SD = 9.82) and their non-smoking partners completed electronic diaries from a self-set quit date on for 22 consecutive days, reporting daily invisible emotional and instrumental social support, daily negative affect, and daily smoking. Results Same-day multilevel analyses showed that at the between-person level, higher individual mean levels of invisible emotional and instrumental support were associated with less daily negative affect. In contrast to our assumption, more receipt of invisible emotional and instrumental support was related to more daily cigarettes smoked. Conclusions The findings are in line with previous results, indicating invisible support to have beneficial relations with affect. However, results emphasize the need for further prospective daily diary approaches for understanding the dynamics of invisible support on smoking cessation.

How narcissistic self-construction sabotages their relationships: Accuracy and bias in partner perception

Trapped by their superordinate goal to maintain a grandiose self, narcissists navigate their relationships wishing to re-assure themselves of their specialness and superiority, using strategies bound to fail. Dyadic analyses of diary data (14 days, 83 couples) showed that narcissists focus on their partners’ shortcomings, becoming experts at detecting negative forms of support, while simultaneously minimizing their partner’s positive intentions. Partners of narcissists, in contrast, appear to have a positive bias in ongoing relationships and seem to compensate for some of the narcissists’ shortcomings. Narcissists’ focus on their own selfconstruction purposes also extends to their parenting roles. In a retrospective study, narcissistic mothers were found to demand superior performance, desiring to show-off their child, yet concurrently attributing their child’s success to themselves. They also exercise psychological control and role-reversal, requiring the child to cater to their needs, and to admire them, while simultaneously oblivious to their child’s needs and desires.