Survivorship care planning, quality of life, and confidence to transition to survivorship: a randomized controlled trial with women ending treatment for breast cancer

Author(s):  
Erin L. O’Hea ◽  
Samantha Creamer ◽  
Julie M. Flahive ◽  
Beth A. Keating ◽  
Candace R. Crocker ◽  
...  
2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (25) ◽  
pp. 6027-6036 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patsy Yates ◽  
Sanchia Aranda ◽  
Maryanne Hargraves ◽  
Bev Mirolo ◽  
Alexandra Clavarino ◽  
...  

PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy of a psychoeducational intervention in improving cancer-related fatigue.Patients and MethodsThis randomized controlled trial involved 109 women commencing adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I or II breast cancer in five chemotherapy treatment centers. Intervention group patients received an individualized fatigue education and support program delivered in the clinic and by phone over three 10- to 20-minute sessions 1 week apart. Instruments included a numeric rating scale assessing confidence with managing fatigue; 11-point numeric rating scales measuring fatigue at worst, average, and best; the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Fatigue and Piper Fatigue Scales; the Cancer Self-Efficacy Scale; the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30; and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. For each outcome, separate analyses of covariance of change scores between baseline (T1) and the three follow-up time points (T2, T3, and T4) were conducted, controlling for the variable's corresponding baseline value.ResultsCompared with the intervention group, mean difference scores between the baseline (T1) and immediate after the test (T2) assessments increased significantly more for the control group for worst and average fatigue, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Fatigue, and Piper fatigue severity and interference measures. These differences were not observed between baseline and T3 and T4 assessments. No significant differences were identified for any pre- or post-test change scores for confidence with managing fatigue, cancer self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, or quality of life.ConclusionPreparatory education and support has the potential to assist women to cope with cancer-related fatigue in the short term. However, further research is needed to identify ways to improve the potency and sustainability of psychoeducational interventions for managing cancer-related fatigue.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anu Susanna Toija ◽  
Tarja Helena Kettunen ◽  
Marjut Hannele Kristiina Leidenius ◽  
Tarja Hellin Kaarina Vainiola ◽  
Risto Paavo Antero Roine

2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 228-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanford I. Nidich ◽  
Jeremy Z. Fields ◽  
Maxwell V. Rainforth ◽  
Rhoda Pomerantz ◽  
David Cella ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 719-728 ◽  
Author(s):  
Floortje K. Ploos van Amstel ◽  
Marlies E. W. J. Peters ◽  
Rogier Donders ◽  
Margrethe S. Schlooz‐Vries ◽  
Lenny J. M. Polman ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (25) ◽  
pp. 3119-3126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda E. Carlson ◽  
Richard Doll ◽  
Joanne Stephen ◽  
Peter Faris ◽  
Rie Tamagawa ◽  
...  

Purpose To compare the efficacy of the following two empirically supported group interventions to help distressed survivors of breast cancer cope: mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR) and supportive-expressive group therapy (SET). Patients and Methods This multisite, randomized controlled trial assigned 271 distressed survivors of stage I to III breast cancer to MBCR, SET, or a 1-day stress management control condition. MBCR focused on training in mindfulness meditation and gentle yoga, whereas SET focused on emotional expression and group support. Both intervention groups included 18 hours of professional contact. Measures were collected at baseline and after intervention by assessors blind to study condition. Primary outcome measures were mood and diurnal salivary cortisol slopes. Secondary outcomes were stress symptoms, quality of life, and social support. Results Using linear mixed-effects models, in intent-to-treat analyses, cortisol slopes were maintained over time in both SET (P = .002) and MBCR (P = .011) groups relative to the control group, whose cortisol slopes became flatter. Women in MBCR improved more over time on stress symptoms compared with women in both the SET (P = .009) and control (P = .024) groups. Per-protocol analyses showed greater improvements in the MBCR group in quality of life compared with the control group (P = .005) and in social support compared with the SET group (P = .012). Conclusion In the largest trial to date, MBCR was superior for improving stress levels, quality of life, and social support for distressed survivors of breast cancer. Both SET and MBCR also resulted in more normative diurnal cortisol profiles than the control condition. The clinical implications of this finding require further investigation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document