Group, Blended and Individual, Unguided Online Delivery of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for People With Cancer: Feasibility Uncontrolled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Online mindfulness based cognitive therapy (eMBCT) has been shown to reduce psychological distress in people with cancer. However, this population has reported lack of support and asynchronous communication as barriers to eMBCT, resulting in higher nonadherence rates than with face-to-face MBCT. Using a co-creation process, we developed 2 formats of eMBCT: group, blended (combination of therapist-guided group and individual online sessions) and individual, unguided (individual, unguided online sessions only). Group, blended eMBCT offers peer support and guidance, whereas individual, unguided eMBCT offers flexibility and the possibility of large-scale implementation. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this nonrandomized feasibility study was to assess aspects of feasibility of the group, blended and individual, unguided eMBCT interventions. METHODS: Participants were people with cancer who chose between group, blended and individual, unguided eMBCT. Both intervention conditions followed the same 8-week eMBCT program, including an introductory session and a silent day (10 sessions total). All sessions for individual, unguided eMBCT occurred via the platform Minddistrict, whereas group, blended eMBCT consisted of 3 online videoconference sessions guided by a mindfulness teacher and 5 sessions via Minddistrict. We assessed the feasibility of the intervention quantitatively and qualitatively by evaluating its acceptability among participants. Additionally, we assessed limited efficacy by looking at the number of questionnaires participants completed pre- and postintervention. RESULTS: We included 12 participants for each eMBCT condition. Participants in group, blended eMBCT completed, on average, 9.7 of 10 sessions, compared with an average 8.3 sessions for individual, unguided eMBCT (excluding dropouts). Of the 24 participants, 13 (54%) agreed to be interviewed (5 unguided and 8 blended). Participants in both conditions reported positive experiences, including the convenience of not having to travel and the flexibility to choose when and where to participate. However, among the barriers for participation, participants in the group, blended condition reported a preference for more group sessions, and participants in the individual, unguided condition reported a lack of guidance. Additionally, for the group, blended condition, the effect sizes were small for all outcome measures (Hedges g range=0.01-0.36), except for fatigue, which had a moderate effect size (Hedges g=0.57). For the individual, unguided condition, the effect sizes were small for all outcome measures (Hedges g range=0.24-0.46), except for mindfulness skills (Hedges g=0.52) and engagement with the intervention (Hedges g=1.53). CONCLUSIONS: Participants in this study had a positive experience with group, blended and individual, unguided eMBCT. Based on the results from this study, we will adjust the intervention prior to conducting a full-scale randomized controlled trial to evaluate effectiveness; we will add 1 group session to the group, blended eMBCT using Zoom as the platform for the group sessions; and we will send reminders to participants to complete questionnaires. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05336916; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05336916.

Effect of blended and unguided online delivery of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy versus care as usual on distress among cancer patients and survivors: protocol for the three-arm parallel randomized controlled buddy trial.

BACKGROUND: One third of cancer patients and survivors experience psychological distress. Previous studies have shown that online mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (eMBCT) supports cancer patients and survivors in managing distress. Lack of peer support and asynchronicity during online interventions have been reported as barriers for treatment adherence and can result in higher drop-out rates. Considering this, two new formats of eMBCT were created. The primary objective of the Buddy trial is to evaluate the (cost) effectiveness of blended and unguided eMBCT versus care as usual (CAU) on psychological distress among cancer patients and survivors. Secondary objectives include evaluating effects on other psychological outcomes and investigating working mechanisms and treatment effect moderators. METHODS: The Buddy trial is a parallel three-armed randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomly assigned to blended therapist-assisted eMBCT, unguided individual eMBCT or CAU. Eligible participants will be Dutch-speaking adult cancer patients or survivors with access to internet. The primary outcome will be psychological distress scores as assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale immediately post-treatment. Secondary outcome measures include fear of cancer recurrence (FCRI), fatigue (CIS-F), rumination (RRQ), mindfulness skills (FFMQ), decentering (EQ), self-compassion (SCS-SF), positive mental health (MHCSF), health related quality of life (EQ-5D), and costs associated with psychiatric illness (TiC-P). Outcome measures will be evaluated at baseline, mid-treatment, immediately post-treatment, and three-, six-, and nine-months follow-up. Possible mediators, such as engagement with interventions (TWEETS), and moderators will be also analyzed. DISCUSSION: There is room to improve eMBCT for cancer patients prior to implementation to ensure adherence and scalability. Blended and unguided eMBCT may reduce psychological distress and improve quality of life and be easily accessible to cancer patients and survivors. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05336916, registered on April 20th, 2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05336916 .

Parents' perspectives on nusinersen treatment for children with spinal muscular atrophy.

AIM: To gain insight into parents' perspectives about their decision-making process concerning nusinersen treatment for their child, including perceived needs and concerns, and to explore factors that influence this process. METHOD: This was an exploratory qualitative interview study among parents of children with spinal muscular atrophy types 1 to 3. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Nineteen parents of 16 children representing 13 families participated. A wide variety of perspectives was reported ranging from a biomedical approach, which focused on battling the disease, to a holistic approach, which aimed for a good quality of life for their child. The most important factors that helped parents to decide were honest and neutral communication with their physician and access to available information. INTERPRETATION: It is important physicians understand that there are different perspectives influencing the decision-making process. Physicians should create an environment that allows parents to accept or reject treatment by communicating honestly and openly with them and by discussing both options extensively. Clear information about pros and cons, recent developments in research, and the experiences of other parents should be made available to enable parents to make an informed decision. What this paper adds Parents perceived different needs and concerns about nusinersen treatment, which emphasized individual differences. Parents' perspectives varied from battling the disease to preserving quality of life. Life expectancy, stopping deterioration, and improving quality of life were the perceived benefits of nusinersen treatment. Open communication about the pros and cons of treatment with clinicians facilitated decision-making. Clear and honest information facilitated the alignment of values and goals.