Exploring and comparing the experience and coping behaviour of men and women with colorectal cancer after chemotherapy treatment:A qualitative longitudinal study

Objectives: Men have higher incidence and mortality rates for nearly all cancers. They are less likely than women to utilise cancer information services and other social support services. The aim of this study was to explore and compare the experience and coping behaviour of men and women after treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods: A longitudinal qualitative study was conducted involving 38 individuals (24 men and 14 women) with CRC. Data were generated using semi-structured interviews at four time points over an 18-month period, post-diagnosis. Interviews focused on participant's experience of CRC and on how gender affected their coping. This paper reports the findings of interviews 3 and 4 which examined the participant's experience after chemotherapy. Results: Three themes emerged from the interviews ('new normal', living with uncertainty and support needs). Many men and women reacted similarly; however, there was some variation evident between and within sexes. The main difference was with regard to the long-term physical side effects of the illness. Many women admitted to still experiencing side effects, whereas many men indicated that they had no problems. These men engaged in practices that aligned with their gender identity and view of masculinity. It must be noted that some men and women were still experiencing an impact. Conclusions: Recovery from the physical and psychological effects of CRC does not occur simultaneously. Healthcare professionals should be aware that not all men (or women) conform to the social stereotypes of masculinity (or femininity). Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Illness perception clusters at diagnosis predict psychological distress among women with breast cancer at 6 months post-diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE:

This study aimed to examine the extent to which illness perceptions and coping strategies among women diagnosed with breast cancer explain psychological distress at diagnosis and at 6?months post diagnosis relative to demographic and illness-related variables.

METHODS:

Women were recruited to the study shortly after diagnosis. A total of 90 women completed study materials (Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised, the Cancer Coping Questionnaire and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) at time 1. The same questionnaires were sent approximately 6?months later to those who had consented at time 1, and completed questionnaires were returned by 72 women.

RESULTS:

Cluster analysis was used to identify groups of respondents who reported a similar profile of illness perception scores. Regression analysis demonstrated that one of these clusters was more likely to experience psychological distress than the other both at diagnosis and at 6?months post diagnosis. Illness perception cluster membership and positive focus type coping were the most important and consistent predictors of lower psychological distress at diagnosis and at 6?months post diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS:

Illness perceptions remained relatively stable over the study period, and therefore we are unable to clarify whether changes in illness cognitions are associated with a corresponding change in psychological symptoms. Future research should evaluate the impact on psychological distress of interventions specifically designed to modify illness cognitions among women with breast cancer.

Reducing the psychological distress of family caregivers of home-based palliative care patients: short-term effects from a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Palliative care is expected to incorporate comprehensive support for family caregivers given that many caregivers suffer psychological morbidity. However, systematically implemented evidence-based psychological support initiatives are lacking.
AIM: The objective of this study was to prepare caregivers for the role of supporting a patient with advanced cancer receiving home-based palliative care by offering a one-to-one psycho-educational intervention. We hypothesised that primary family caregivers who participated in the intervention would report decreased psychological distress (primary outcome), fewer unmet needs and increased levels of perceived preparedness, competence and positive emotions.
METHODS: A three-arm randomised controlled trial was conducted comparing two versions of the intervention (one face-to-face visit versus two visits) plus standard care to a control group (standard care) across four sites in Australia.
RESULTS: A total of 298 participants were recruited; 148 were in the Control condition, 57 in Intervention 1 (one visit) and 93 in Intervention 2 (two visits). Relative to participants in the control group; the psychological well-being of participants in the intervention condition was improved by a small amount but non-significantly. No significant reduction in unmet needs or improvements in positive aspects of caregiving amongst the intervention group were identified. However, the intervention demonstrated significant improvements in participants' levels of preparedness and competence for Intervention 2.
CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: This research adds to accumulating body of evidence demonstrating that relatively short psycho-educational interventions can enable family caregivers to feel more prepared and competent in the role of supporting a dying relative. Further investigation is required to determine the longer term outcomes of such interventions. 

Reducing the psychological distress of family caregivers of home based palliative care patients: Longer term effects from a randomised controlled trial.

Background: Palliative care incorporates comprehensive support of family caregivers because many of them experience burden and distress. However, evidence-based support initiatives are few.

Purpose: We evaluated a one-to-one psychoeducational intervention aimed at mitigating the distress of caregivers of patients with advanced cancer receiving home-based palliative care. We hypothesised that caregivers would report decreased distress as assessed by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ).

Method: A randomised controlled trial comparing two versions of the delivery of the intervention (one face-to-face home visit plus telephone calls versus two visits) plus standard care to a control group (standard care only) across four sites in Australia.

Results: Recruitment to the one visit condition was 57, the two visit condition 93, and the control 148. We previously reported non-significant changes in distress between times 1 (baseline) and 2 (1-week post-intervention) but significant gains in competence and preparedness. We report here changes in distress between times 1 and 3 (8-week post-death). There was significantly less worsening in distress between times 1 and 3 in the one visit intervention group than in the control group; however, no significant difference was found between the two visit intervention and the control group.

Conclusions: These results are consistent with the aim of the intervention, and they support existing evidence demonstrating that relatively short psychoeducational interventions can help family caregivers who are supporting a dying relative. The sustained benefit during the bereavement period may also have positive resource implications, which should be the subject of future inquiry. © 2014 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Understanding of BRCA1/2 genetic tests results:the importance of objective and subjective numeracy

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.

Assessing the needs of informal caregivers to cancer survivors: a review of the instruments

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.

Cancer survivors with self-reported late effects: their health status, care needs and service utilisation

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.

Psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life and emotional wellbeing in newly diagnosed cancer patients

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.

Psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life and emotional wellbeing in newly diagnosed cancer patients

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.