Show simple item record

Randomized clinical trial of a brief and extensive dyadic intervention for advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers

dc.contributor.authorNorthouse, Laurel L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMood, Darlene W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSchafenacker, Annen_US
dc.contributor.authorKalemkerian, Gregoryen_US
dc.contributor.authorZalupski, Marken_US
dc.contributor.authorLoRusso, Patriciaen_US
dc.contributor.authorHayes, Daniel F.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHussain, Mahaen_US
dc.contributor.authorRuckdeschel, Johnen_US
dc.contributor.authorFendrick, A. Marken_US
dc.contributor.authorTrask, Peter C.en_US
dc.contributor.authorRonis, David L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKershaw, Traceen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-03-05T18:18:06Z
dc.date.available2014-05-01T14:28:14Zen_US
dc.date.issued2013-03en_US
dc.identifier.citationNorthouse, Laurel L.; Mood, Darlene W.; Schafenacker, Ann; Kalemkerian, Gregory; Zalupski, Mark; LoRusso, Patricia; Hayes, Daniel F.; Hussain, Maha; Ruckdeschel, John; Fendrick, A. Mark; Trask, Peter C.; Ronis, David L.; Kershaw, Trace (2013). "Randomized clinical trial of a brief and extensive dyadic intervention for advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers." Psycho‐Oncology 22(3): 555-563. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/96760>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1057-9249en_US
dc.identifier.issn1099-1611en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/96760
dc.description.abstractBackground Few intervention programs assist patients and their family caregivers to manage advanced cancer and maintain their quality of life (QOL). This study examined (i) whether patient–caregiver dyads (i.e., pairs) randomly assigned to a brief or extensive dyadic intervention (the FOCUS Program) had better outcomes than dyads randomly assigned to usual care and (ii) whether patients' risk for distress and other factors moderated the effect of the brief or extensive program on outcomes. Methods Advanced cancer patients and their caregivers ( N  = 484 dyads) were stratified by patients' baseline risk for distress (high versus low), cancer type (lung, colorectal, breast, or prostate), and research site and then randomly assigned to a brief (three‐session) or extensive (six‐session) intervention or control. The interventions offered dyads information and support. Intermediary outcomes were appraisals (i.e., appraisal of illness/caregiving, uncertainty, and hopelessness) and resources (i.e., coping, interpersonal relationships, and self‐efficacy). The primary outcome was QOL. Data were collected prior to intervention and post‐intervention (3 and 6 months from baseline). The final sample was 302 dyads. Repeated measures MANCOVA was used to evaluate outcomes. Results Significant group by time interactions showed that there was an improvement in dyads' coping ( p  < 0.05), self‐efficacy ( p  < 0.05), and social QOL ( p  < 0.01) and in caregivers' emotional QOL ( p  < 0.05). Effects varied by intervention dose. Most effects were found at 3 months only. Risk for distress accounted for very few moderation effects. Conclusions Both brief and extensive programs had positive outcomes for patient–caregiver dyads, but few sustained effects. Patient–caregiver dyads benefit when viewed as the ‘unit of care’. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.en_US
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Ltden_US
dc.subject.otherRandomized Clinical Trialen_US
dc.subject.otherFamily Caregiveren_US
dc.subject.otherAdvanced Canceren_US
dc.subject.otherQuality of Lifeen_US
dc.subject.otherIntervention Doseen_US
dc.subject.otherRisk for Distressen_US
dc.subject.otherCanceren_US
dc.subject.otherOncologyen_US
dc.titleRandomized clinical trial of a brief and extensive dyadic intervention for advanced cancer patients and their family caregiversen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.pmid22290823en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96760/1/pon3036.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/pon.3036en_US
dc.identifier.sourcePsycho‐Oncologyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNorthouse LL, Mood D, Schafenacker A et al. Randomized clinical trial of a family intervention for prostate cancer patients and their spouses. Cancer 2007; 110: 2809 – 2818.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrost MH, Suman VJ, Rummans TA et al. Physical, psychological and social well‐being of women with breast cancer: the influence of disease phase. Psycho‐Oncology 2000; 9 ( 3 ): 221 – 231.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHagedoorn 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 ): 1 – 30.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNorthouse LL, Mood D, Kershaw T et al. Quality of life of women with recurrent breast cancer and their family members. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20 ( 19 ): 4050 – 4064.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKeefe FJ, Ahles TA, Porter LS et al. The self‐efficacy of family caregivers for helping cancer patients manage pain at end‐of‐life. Pain 2003; 103: 157 – 162.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKissane DW, McKenzie M, Bloch S et al. Family focused grief therapy: a randomized, controlled trial in palliative care and bereavement. Am J Psychiatry 2006; 163 ( 7 ): 1208 – 1218.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcCorkle R, Robinson L, Nuamah I et al. The effects of home nursing care for patients during terminal illness on the bereaved's psychological distress. Nurs Res 1998; 47 ( 1 ): 2 – 10.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNorthouse 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. Psycho‐Oncology 2005; 14: 478 – 491.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarter PA. A brief behavioral sleep intervention for family caregivers of persons with cancer. Cancer Nurs 2006; 29 ( 2 ): 95 – 103.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHudson PL, Aranda S, Hayman‐White K. A psycho‐educational intervention for family caregivers of patients receiving palliative care: a randomized controlled trial. J Pain Symptom Manage 2005; 30 ( 4 ): 329 – 341.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcMillan SC, Small BJ, Weitzner M et al. Impact of coping skills intervention with family caregivers of hospice patients with cancer. Cancer 2006; 106: 214 – 222.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWalsh K, Jones L, Tookman A et al. Reducing emotional distress in people caring for patients receiving specialist palliative care. Br J Psychiatry 2007; 190: 142 – 147.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcMillan SC, Small BJ. Using the COPE intervention for family caregivers to improve symptoms of hospice homecare patients: a clinical trial. Oncol Nurs Forum 2007; 34: 313 – 321.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZabora J, Brintzenhofeszoc K, Curbow B et al. The prevalence of psychological distress by cancer site. Psycho‐Oncology 2001; 10: 19 – 28.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLazarus RS, Folkman S (eds). Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. Springer: New York, 1984.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHintz JL. PASS 2000 User's Guide. Number Cruncher Statistical Systems: Kaysville, Utah, 2000.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNorthouse LL, Mood D, Montie J et al. Living with prostate cancer: patients' and spouses' psychosocial status and quality of life. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 4171 – 4177.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHarden J, Falahee M, Bickes J et al. Factors associated with prostate cancer patients' and their spouses' satisfaction with a family intervention. Cancer Nurs 2009; 32: 482 – 492.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWorden JW. Psychosocial screening of cancer patients. J Psychosoc Oncol 1983; 1: 1 – 10.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOberst MT. Appraisal of Illness Scale: Manual for Use. Wayne State University: Detroit, 1991.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMishel M, Epstein D. Uncertainty in Illness Scales: Manual. University of Arizona: Tucson, AZ, 1990.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBeck AT, Weissman A, Lester D et al. The measurement of pessimism: the hopelessness scale. J Consult Clin Psychol 1974; 42 ( 6 ): 861 – 865.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarver CS. You want to measure coping but your protocol's too long: consider the Brief COPE. Int J Behav Med 1997; 4 ( 1 ): 92 – 100.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKershaw T, Mood D, Newth G et al. Longitudinal analysis of a model to predict quality of life in prostate cancer patients and their spouses. Ann Behav Med 2008; 36: 117 – 128.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKershaw T, Northouse L, Kritpracha C et al. Coping strategies and quality of life in women with advanced breast cancer and their family caregivers. Psychol Health 2004; 19: 139 – 155.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNorthouse LL. Social support in patients' and husbands' adjustment to breast cancer. Nurs Res 1988; 37 ( 2 ): 91 – 95.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLewis FM. Family Home Visitation Study Final Report. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 1996.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCella D, Tulsky DS, Gray G et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11 ( 3 ): 570 – 579.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBishop MM, Beaumont JL, Hahn EA et al. Late effects of cancer and hematopoietic stem‐cell transplantation on spouses or partners compared with survivors and survivor‐matched controls. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 1403 – 1411.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.