scholarly journals Conquer fear: protocol of a randomised controlled trial of a psychological intervention to reduce fear of cancer recurrence

BMC Cancer ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Phyllis N Butow ◽  
◽  
Melanie L Bell ◽  
Allan B Smith ◽  
Joanna E Fardell ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA10000-LBA10000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane McNeil Beith ◽  
Belinda Thewes ◽  
Jane Turner ◽  
Jemma Gilchrist ◽  
Louise Sharpe ◽  
...  

LBA10000 The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstracts.asco.org at 2:00 PM (EDT) on Friday, June 2, 2017, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2017, issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Saturday edition of ASCO Daily News.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janice M. Kan ◽  
Mbathio Dieng ◽  
Phyllis N. Butow ◽  
Shab Mireskandari ◽  
Stephanie Tesson ◽  
...  

Purpose: Psychological interventions targeting fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) are effective in reducing fear and distress. Process evaluations are an important, yet scarce adjunct to published intervention trials, despite their utility in guiding the interpretation of study outcomes and optimizing intervention design for broader implementation. Accordingly, this paper reports the findings of a process evaluation conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial of a psychological intervention for melanoma patients.Methods: Men and women with a history of Stage 0–II melanoma at high-risk of developing new primary disease were recruited via High Risk Melanoma Clinics across Sydney, Australia and randomly allocated to receive the psychological intervention (n = 80) or usual care (n = 84). Intervention participants received a tailored psycho-educational resource and three individual psychotherapeutic sessions delivered via telehealth. Qualitative and quantitative data on intervention context, processes, and delivery (reach, dose, and fidelity), and mechanisms of impact (participant responses, moderators of outcome) were collected from a range of sources, including participant surveys, psychotherapeutic session audio-recordings, and clinical records.Results: Almost all participants reported using the psycho-educational resource (97%), received all intended psychotherapy sessions (96%), and reported high satisfaction with both intervention components. Over 80% of participants would recommend the intervention to others, and a small proportion (4%) found discussion of melanoma-related experiences confronting. Perceived benefits included enhanced doctor-patient communication, talking more openly with family members about melanoma, and improved coping. Of potential moderators, only higher FCR severity at baseline (pre-intervention) was associated with greater reductions in FCR severity (primary outcome) at 6-month follow-up (primary endpoint).Conclusions: Findings support the acceptability and feasibility of a psychological intervention to reduce FCR amongst individuals at high risk of developing another melanoma. Implementation into routine melanoma care is an imperative next step, with FCR screening recommended to identify those most likely to derive the greatest psychological benefit.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Nicolaisen ◽  
Dorte G Hansen ◽  
Mariët Hagedoorn ◽  
Henrik E Flyger ◽  
Nina Rottmann ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e022205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Williamson ◽  
Lesley Ward ◽  
Karan Vadher ◽  
Susan J Dutton ◽  
Ben Parker ◽  
...  

IntroductionNeurogenic claudication due to spinal stenosis is common in older adults. The effectiveness of conservative interventions is not known. The aim of the study is to estimate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a physiotherapist-delivered, combined physical and psychological intervention.Methods and analysisThis is a pragmatic, multicentred, randomised controlled trial. Participants are randomised to a combined physical and psychological intervention (Better Outcomes for Older people with Spinal Trouble (BOOST) programme) or best practice advice (control). Community-dwelling adults, 65 years and over, with neurogenic claudication are identified from community and secondary care services. Recruitment is supplemented using a primary care-based cohort. Participants are registered prospectively and randomised in a 2:1 ratio (intervention:control) using a web-based service to ensure allocation concealment. The target sample size is a minimum of 402. The BOOST programme consists of an individual assessment and twelve 90 min classes, including education and discussion underpinned by cognitive behavioural techniques, exercises and walking circuit. During and after the classes, participants undertake home exercises and there are two support telephone calls to promote adherence with the exercises. Best practice advice is delivered in one to three individual sessions with a physiotherapist. The primary outcome is the Oswestry Disability Index at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the 6 Minute Walk Test, Short Physical Performance Battery, Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and Gait Self-Efficacy Scale. Outcomes are measured at 6 and 12 months by researchers who are masked to treatment allocation. The primary statistical analysis will be by ‘intention to treat’. There is a parallel health economic evaluation and qualitative study.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was given on 3 March 2016 (National Research Ethics Committee number: 16/LO/0349). This protocol adheres to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials checklist. The results will be reported at conferences and in peer-reviewed publications using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines. A plain English summary will be published on the BOOST website.Trial registration numberISRCTN12698674; Pre-results.


2018 ◽  
Vol 119 (11) ◽  
pp. 1307-1315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annika von Heymann-Horan ◽  
Pernille Bidstrup ◽  
Mai-Britt Guldin ◽  
Per Sjøgren ◽  
Elisabeth Anne Wreford Andersen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document