ABSTRACT
Psychological distress while coping with cancer is a highly prevalent and yet underrecognized and burdensome adverse effect of cancer diagnosis and treatment. Left unaddressed, psychological distress can further exacerbate poor mental health, negatively influence health management behaviors, and lead to a worsening quality of life. This multimethod study primarily focused on understanding veterans' psychological distress and personal experiences living with lung cancer (an underrepresented patient population). In a sample of 60 veterans diagnosed with either nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or small cell lung cancer (SCLC), we found that distress is common across clinical psychology measures of depression (37% [using the Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9 measure]), anxiety (35% [using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder, GAD-7 measure]), and cancer-related posttraumatic stress (13% [using the Posttraumatic Stress Symptom Checklist measure]). A total of 23% of the sample endorsed distress scores on two or more mental health screeners. Using a broader cancer-specific distress measure (National Comprehensive Cancer Network), 67% of our sample scored above the clinical cutoff (i.e., ≥ 3), and in the follow-up symptom checklist of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network measure, a majority endorsed feeling sadness (75%), worry (73%), and depression (60%). Qualitative analysis with a subset of 25 veterans highlighted that psychological distress is common, variable in nature, and quite bothersome. Future research should (a) identify veterans at risk for distress while living with lung cancer and (b) test supportive mental health interventions to target psychological distress among this vulnerable veteran population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
ABSTRACT
Cancer and its treatment pose challenges that affect not only patients but also their significant others, including intimate partners. Accumulating evidence suggests that couples' ability to communicate effectively plays a major role in the psychological adjustment of both individuals and the quality of their relationship. Two key conceptual models have been proposed to account for how couple communication impacts psychological and relationship adjustment: the social-cognitive processing (SCP) model and the relationship intimacy (RI) model. These models posit different mechanisms and outcomes, and thus have different implications for intervention. The purpose of this project is to test and compare the utility of these models using comprehensive and methodologically rigorous methods. Aims are: (1) to examine the overall fit of the SCP and RI models in explaining patient and partner psychological and relationship adjustment as they occur on a day-to-day basis and over the course of 1 year; (2) to examine the fit of the models for different subgroups (males vs. females, and patients vs. partners); and (3) to examine the utility of various methods of assessing communication by examining the degree to which baseline indices from different measurement strategies predict self-reported adjustment at 1-year follow up. The study employs a longitudinal, multi-method approach to examining communication processes including: standard self-report questionnaires assessing process and outcome variables collected quarterly over the course of 1 year; smartphone-based ecological momentary assessments to sample participant reports in real time; and laboratory-based couple conversations from which we derive observational measures of communicative behavior and affective expression, as well as vocal indices of emotional arousal. Participants are patients with stage II-IV breast, colon, rectal, or lung cancer and their spouses/partners, recruited from two NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers. Results will be published in scientific journals, presented at scientific conferences, and conveyed to a larger audience through infographics and social media outlets. Findings will inform theory, measurement, and the design and implementation of efficacious interventions aimed at optimizing both patient and partner well-being.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to obtain patient evaluations of the content, structure, and delivery modality of Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC), a novel psychosocial intervention for patients with advanced cancer and pain. MCPC aims to help patients connect with valued sources of meaning in their lives (e.g., family relationships), while providing training in evidence-based cognitive and behavioral skills (e.g., guided imagery) to reduce pain. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients with stage IV solid tumor cancers and persistent pain. Transcripts were analyzed using methods from applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: When evaluating MCPC's educational information and skills training descriptions, participants described ways in which this content resonated with their experience. Many coped with their pain and poor prognosis by relying on frameworks that provided them with a sense of meaning, often involving their personally held religious or spiritual beliefs. They also expressed a need for learning ways to cope with pain in addition to taking medication. A few participants offered helpful suggestions for refining MCPC's content, such as addressing common co-occurring symptoms of sleep disturbance and fatigue. Concerning MCPC's structure and delivery modality, most participants preferred that sessions include their family caregiver and described remote delivery (i.e., telephone or videoconference) as being more feasible than attending in-person sessions. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Participants were interested in an intervention that concurrently focuses on learning pain coping skills and enhancing a sense of meaning. Using remote delivery modalities may reduce access barriers (e.g., travel) that would otherwise prevent many patients from utilizing psychosocial services.