Dyadic psychosocial interventions for patients with cancer and their caregivers: an update.
Journal
Current opinion in oncology
ISSN: 1531-703X
Titre abrégé: Curr Opin Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9007265
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 07 2022
01 07 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
23
6
2022
medline:
19
7
2022
entrez:
22
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cancer causes significant impacts on patients and their caregivers. Cancer is also associated with multiple physical and emotional challenges for the patient-caregiver dyad. This patient-caregiver dyad should be considered as a unit of care by healthcare providers and supported through dedicated psychological interventions. Twelve studies that tested dyadic interventions aiming to support patient-caregiver dyads were identified from the period April 2020 to December 2021. Studies were predominantly randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and single-arm pilot studies. Half of the interventions were online. Interventions were mostly focused on dyadic adjustment and appeared to be acceptable, feasible and globally effective. However, effects were evident predominantly on individual rather than dyadic outcomes. The interventions targeted either individual psychological outcomes, such as depression and anxiety, and are reported to be effective or various individual outcomes and also appeared to be effective. However, there was a large heterogeneity in quality and sample sizes across all intervention types. Dyadic psychological interventions may be an effective support for patient-caregiver dyads dealing with multiple physical and emotional challenges. Online interventions and the variability of intervention types may respond to dyads specific needs, but though need to be rigorously evaluated through powered RCTs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35730497
doi: 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000835
pii: 00001622-202207000-00009
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
304-312Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
World Health Organization. Cancer Today, 2020. https://gco.iarc.fr/today [Accessed 15 December 2021].
Hagedoorn M, Sanderman R, Bolks HN, et al. Distress in couples coping with cancer: a meta-analysis and critical review of role and gender effects. Psychol Bull 2008; 134:1–30.
Rhee YS, Yun YH, Park S, et al. Depression in family caregivers of cancer patients: the feeling of burden as a predictor of depression. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:5890–5895.
Bevans M, Sternberg E. Caregiving burden, stress and health effects among family caregiver of adult cancer patients. Natl Inst Heal 2012; 307:398–403.
Caruso R, Nanni MG, Riba MB, et al. The burden of psychosocial morbidity related to cancer: patient and family issues. Int Rev Psychiatry 2017; 29:389–402.
Romito F, Goldzweig G, Cormio C, et al. Informal caregiving for cancer patients. Cancer 2013; 119:2160–2169.
Stenberg U, Ruland CM, Miaskowski C. Review of the literature on the effects of caring for a patient with cancer. Psychooncology 2009; 19:1013–1025.
Langer SL, Brown JD, Syrjala KL. Protective buffering and emotional desynchrony among spousal caregivers of cancer patients. Cancer 2009; 115: (Suppl 18): 4311–4325.
Thompson T, Ketcher D, Gray TF, Kent EE. The Dyadic Cancer Outcomes Framework: a general framework of the effects of cancer on patients and informal caregivers. Soc Sci Med 2021; 287:114357.
Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping: a systemic-transactional view of stress and coping among couples: theory and empirical findings. Rev Eur Psy Appl 1997; 47:137–140.
Kayser K, Watson LE, Andrade LT. Cancer as a ‘We-disease’: examining the process of coping from a relational perspective. Fam Syst Health 2007; 25:404–418.
Badr H, Acitelli L. Re-thinking dyadic coping in the context of chronic illness. Curr Opin Psychol 2017; 13:44–48.
Manne S, Badr H. Intimacy and relationship processes in couples’ psychosocial adaptation to cancer. Cancer 2008; 112:2541–2555.
Lee E, Roberts LJ. Between individual and family coping: a decade of theory and research on couples coping with health-related stress. J Fam Theory Rev 2018; 10:141–164.
Duncan M, Moschopoulou E, Herrington E, et al. Review of systematic reviews of nonpharmacological interventions to improve quality of life in cancer survivors. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e015860.
Jadalla A, Ginex P, Coleman M, Vrabel M. Family caregiver strain and burden: a systematic review of evidence-based interventions when caring for patients with cancer. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2020; 24:31–50.
Badr H, Krebs P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions for couples coping with cancer. Psychooncology 2013; 22:1688–1704.
Li Q, Loke AY. A literature review on the mutual impact of the spousal caregiver-cancer-patients dyads: communication, reciprocal influence, and caregiver-patient congruence. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2014; 18:58–65.
Sharma A, Saneha C, Phligbua W. Effects of dyadic interventions on quality of life among cancer patients: an integrative review. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 2021; 8:115–131.
Lambert SD, Duncan LR, Ellis J, et al. Acceptability and usefulness of a dyadic, tailored, web-based, psychosocial and physical activity self-management program (TEMPO): a qualitative study. J Clin Med 2020; 9:3284.
Hallward L, Chemtob K, Lambert SD, et al. Prostate cancer survivors’ and caregivers’ experiences using behavior change techniques during a web-based self-management and physical activity program: a qualitative study. J Clin Med 2020; 9:3244.
Price-Blackshear MA, Pratscher SD, Oyler DL, et al. Online couples mindfulness-based intervention for young breast cancer survivors and their partners: a randomized-control trial. J Psychosoc Oncol 2020; 38:592–611.
Tiete J, Delvaux N, Liénard A, et al. Efficacy of a dyadic intervention to improve communication between patients with cancer and their caregivers: a randomized pilot trial. Patient Educ Couns 2020; 104:563–570.
Milbury K, Li Y, Durrani S, et al. A mindfulness-based intervention as a supportive care strategy for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer and their spouses: results of a 3-arm pilot randomized controlled trial. Oncologist 2020; 25:e1794–e1802.
Fergus K, Ahmad S, Gardner S, et al. Couplelinks online intervention for young couples facing breast cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Psychooncology 2021; 31:512–520.
Gremore TM, Brockstein B, Porter LS, et al. Couple-based communication intervention for head and neck cancer: a randomized pilot trial. Support Care Cancer 2020; 29:3267–3275.
Porter LS, Steel JL, Fairclough DL, et al. Caregiver-guided pain coping skills training for patients with advanced cancer: results from a randomized clinical trial. Palliat Med 2021; 35:952–961.
Titler MG, Shuman C, Dockham B, et al. Acceptability of a dyadic psychoeducational intervention for patients and caregivers. Oncol Nurs Forum 2020; 47:342–351.
Ketcher D, Thompson C, Otto AK, et al. In eight minutes we talked more about our goals, relationship, than we have in years’: a pilot of patient–caregiver discussions in a neuro-oncology clinic. Palliat Med 2021; 35:389–396.
Chen HL, Annie Kao TS, Reuille KM, et al. FOCUS Program treating patients with cancer and family caregivers as a unit of care. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2021; 25:E17–E25.
Çömez S, Karayurt Ö. The effect of web-based training on life quality and spouse adjustment for women with breast cancer and their spouses. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2020; 47:101758.
Northouse L, Kershaw T, Mood D, et al. Effects of a family intervention on the quality of life of women with recurrent breast cancer and their family caregivers. Psychooncology 2005; 14:478–491.
Northouse LL, Mood DW, Schafenacker A, et al. Randomized clinical trial of a family intervention for prostate cancer patients and their spouses. Cancer 2007; 110:2809–2818.
Roy SC. The Roy Adaptation Model. New Jersey, USA: Pearson Education. Inc, Upper Saddle River; 2009.
Porter LS, Samsa G, Steel JL, et al. Caregiver-guided pain coping skills training for patients with advanced cancer: background, design, and challenges for the CaringPals study. Clin Trials 2019; 16:263–272.