Outcomes from the Moving Beyond Cancer psychoeducational, randomized, controlled trial with breast cancer patients.
ABSTRACT Evidence suggests that the re-entry phase (ie, early period after medical treatment completion) presents distinct challenges for cancer patients. To facilitate the transition to recovery, we conducted the Moving Beyond Cancer (MBC) trial, a multisite, randomized, controlled trial of psychoeducational interventions for breast cancer patients.
Breast cancer patients were registered within 6 weeks after surgery. After medical treatment, they completed baseline measures and were randomly assigned to standard National Cancer Institute print material (CTL); standard print material and peer-modeling videotape (VID); or standard print material, videotape, two sessions with a trained cancer educator, and informational workbook (EDU). Two primary end points were examined: energy/fatigue and cancer-specific distress. Secondary end points were depressive symptoms and post-traumatic growth. Perceived preparedness for re-entry was analyzed as a moderator of effects.
Of 558 women randomly assigned to treatment, 418 completed the 6-month assessment and 399 completed the 12-month assessment. In analyses controlling for study site and baseline depressive symptoms, VID produced significant improvement in energy/fatigue at 6 months relative to CTL, particularly among women who felt less prepared for re-entry at baseline. No significant main effect of the interventions emerged on cancer-specific distress, but EDU prompted greater reduction in this outcome relative to CTL at 6 months for patients who felt more prepared for re-entry. Between-group differences in the primary outcomes were not significant at 12 months, and no significant effects emerged on the secondary end points.
A peer-modeling videotape can accelerate the recovery of energy during the re-entry phase in women treated for breast cancer, particularly among those who feel less prepared for re-entry.
- SourceAvailable from: Julia Rowland[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The number of individuals living with a history of cancer is estimated at 13.7 million in the United States and is expected to rise with the aging of the population. With expanding attention to the psychosocial and physical consequences of surviving illness, psychological science and evidence-based practice are making important contributions to addressing the pressing needs of cancer survivors. Research is demonstrating that adults diagnosed with cancer evidence generally positive psychosocial adjustment over time; however, a subset is at risk for compromised psychological and physical health stemming from long-term or late effects of cancer and its treatment. In this article, we characterize survivorship after medical treatment completion during the periods of reentry, early survivorship, and long-term survivorship. We describe the major psychosocial and physical sequelae facing adults during those periods, highlight promising posttreatment psychosocial and behavioral interventions, and offer recommendations for future research and evidence-based practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).American Psychologist 02/2015; 70(2):159-174. DOI:10.1037/a0037875 · 6.87 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Breast cancer, potentially a traumatic stressor, may be accompanied by negative outcomes, such as posttraumatic stress disorder or positive changes, such as posttraumatic growth. The authors reviewed 24 studies published from 1990 to 2010 that measured posttraumatic stress disorder and posttraumatic growth in women with breast cancer, in terms of frequency rates, factors associated with posttraumatic stress disorder and posttraumatic growth, and their interrelationships. A relatively small percentage of women experienced posttraumatic stress disorder, while the majority of them reported posttraumatic growth. Age, education, economic status, subjective appraisal of the threat of the disease, treatment, support from significant others, and positive coping strategies were among the most frequently reported factors associated with these phenomena. Moreover, posttraumatic stress disorder and posttraumatic growth were not related. Future research should shed more light on posttraumatic growth and posttraumatic stress disorder among women with breast cancer, the parameters that influence them, and their possible relationship.Women & Health 07/2012; 52(5):503-16. DOI:10.1080/03630242.2012.679337 · 1.05 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study's goals were to examine coping strategies of women and their male partners as predictors of change in women's adjustment over the year following breast cancer treatment and to test whether partners' coping processes interact to predict adjustment. In a sample of women who had recently completed breast cancer treatment and were taking part in a psychoeducational intervention trial, the patients' and partners' cancer-specific coping strategies were assessed at study entry (average of 10 months after diagnosis). Assessed at study entry and 20 months after diagnosis (n = 139 couples), dependent variables were women's general (i.e., vitality, depressive symptoms, relationship satisfaction) and cancer-specific adjustment (i.e., cancer-specific distress, perceived benefits). Both patients' and partners' coping strategies at study entry predicted change in women's adjustment at 20 months. Women's use of approach-oriented coping strategies predicted improvement in their vitality and depressive symptoms, men's use of avoidant coping predicted declining marital satisfaction for wives, and men's approach-oriented strategies predicted an increase in women's perception of cancer-related benefits. Patients' and partners' coping strategies also interacted to predict adjustment, such that congruent coping strategy use generally predicted better adaptation than did dissimilar coping. Findings highlight the utility of examining patients' and partners' coping strategies simultaneously.Journal of Family Psychology 09/2011; 25(6):963-72. DOI:10.1037/a0025551 · 1.89 Impact Factor