Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Language
Affiliation country
Publication year range
1.
Psychooncology ; 33(1): e6270, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38117026

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer survivors (CRCS) often experience high levels of distress. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effect of blended cognitive behavior therapy (bCBT) on distress severity among distressed CRCS. METHODS: CRCS (targeted N = 160) with high distress (Distress Thermometer ≥5) between 6 months and 5 years post cancer treatment were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to receive bCBT, (14 weeks including five face-to-face, and three telephone sessions and access to interactive website), or care as usual (CAU). Participants completed questionnaires at baseline (T0), four (T1) and 7 months later (T2). Intervention participants completed bCBT between T0 and T1. The primary outcome analyzed in the intention-to-treat population was distress severity (Brief Symptom Inventory; BSI-18) immediately post-intervention (T1). RESULTS: 84 participants were randomized to bCBT (n = 41) or CAU (n = 43). In intention-to-treat analysis, the intervention significantly reduced distress immediately post-intervention (-3.86 points, 95% CI -7.00 to -0.73) and at 7 months post-randomization (-3.88 points, 95% CI -6.95 to -0.80) for intervention compared to CAU. Among secondary outcomes, at both time points, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, cancer worry, and cancer-specific distress were significantly lower in the intervention arm. Self-efficacy scores were significantly higher. Overall treatment satisfaction was high (7.4/10, N = 36) and 94% of participants would recommend the intervention to other colorectal cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: The blended COloRectal canceR distrEss reduCTion intervention seems an efficacious psychological intervention to reduce distress severity in distressed CRCS. Yet uncertainty remains about effectiveness because fewer participants than targeted were included in this trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR6025.


Subject(s)
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy , Colorectal Neoplasms , Psychological Distress , Humans , Anxiety/therapy , Anxiety/psychology , Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy , Colorectal Neoplasms/psychology , Survivors
2.
Psychooncology ; 32(4): 558-568, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36645210

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: High psychological distress is reported by one third of colorectal cancer survivors (CRCS). However, intervention studies for CRCS have reported low participation rates. In this study, reasons for non-participation and low uptake in a psychological intervention trial were investigated. METHODS: CRCS were recruited for a randomized clinical trial on the efficacy of blended cognitive behavior therapy for psychological distress via databases, follow-up consultations, advertisements and an ongoing population-based study. The recruitment flow and reasons for non-participation were analyzed for patients recruited between 2016 and 2020. Subgroups were compared based on demographic, clinical and screening data. High distress as study entry criterion was measured with the Distress Thermometer (DT ≥ 5) and the problem list (PL). RESULTS: From all recruitment methods together, 1326 CRCS responded to the invitation letter of whom 510 (38%) were interested in receiving a screening questionnaire. Interested CRCS were significantly younger than non-interested CRCS (p < 0.001). Most non-interested CRCS reported having no complaints. Of interested CRCS, 448 (88%) completed screening with the DT of which 213 (48%) CRCS scored above the DT cutoff for high distress. The majority expressed no need for help resulting in 84 (4% of eligible) CRCS included in the trial. Younger age, shorter time since diagnosis and more problems on the PL were positively related to participation. CONCLUSIONS: In this study a low participation rate was found. However, patients with high distress and most in need for help were included in the trial. For future research it is recommended to perform pilot- and feasibility studies to optimize recruitment.


Subject(s)
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy , Colorectal Neoplasms , Humans , Stress, Psychological/diagnosis , Psychosocial Intervention , Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy , Survivors
3.
Cancers (Basel) ; 14(16)2022 Aug 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36010883

ABSTRACT

(1) Background: Studies examining the psychosocial impact of living long term on systemic treatment in advanced cancer patients are scarce. This scoping review aimed to answer the research question "What has been reported about psychosocial factors among patients living with advanced cancer receiving life-long systemic treatment?", by synthesizing psychosocial data, and evaluating the terminology used to address these patients; (2) Methods: This scoping review was conducted following the five stages of the framework of Arksey and O'Malley (2005); (3) Results: 141 articles published between 2000 and 2021 (69% after 2015) were included. A large variety of terms referring to the patient group was observed. Synthesizing qualitative studies identified ongoing uncertainty, anxiety and fear of disease progression or death, hope in treatment results and new treatment options, loss in several aspects of life, and worries about the impact of disease on loved ones and changes in social life to be prominent psychosocial themes. Of 82 quantitative studies included in the review, 76% examined quality of life, 46% fear of disease progression or death, 26% distress or depression, and 4% hope, while few studies reported on adaptation or cognitive aspects. No quantitative studies focused on uncertainty, loss, or social impact; (4) Conclusion and clinical implications: Prominent psychosocial themes reported in qualitative studies were not included in quantitative research using specific validated questionnaires. More robust studies using quantitative research designs should be conducted to further understand these psychological constructs. Furthermore, the diversity of terminology found in the literature calls for a uniform definition to better address this specific patient group in research and in practice.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL