Search

Although anxiety and depression are important determinants of mental health, the literature in this area is sparse as most studies focus on the period during treatment. Mental health problems can affect cancer recovery as well as quality of life and survival. In this cross-sectional study, we investigated the prevalence of anxiety and depression in Slovenian cancer survivors after treatment and assessed the associated correlates during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: Few evidence‐based interventions addressing high levels of fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) have been implemented. Understanding how these might be implemented is crucial to bridge the research‐practice gap. This study investigated the feasibility of implementing the blended Survivors' Worries of Recurrent Disease (SWORD) intervention in real‐world psycho‐oncology practice. Methods: SWORD was offered for 15 months (2021–2022) as the standard care for clinical FCR in a university hospital, a general hospital, and psycho‐oncological center. We evaluated using a mixed‐methods design six feasibility outcomes based on Bowen's framework: demand, limited effectiveness, degree of execution, acceptability, practicality, and integration. Anonymous data were collected for all oncology patients on referral. Study participants completed questionnaires before and after treatment, including the Cancer Worry Scale (CWS‐6) as the primary measure of effectiveness. Qualitative data included interviews with patients and psychologists, and field notes. Results: Regarding demand, 81 of 644 patients referred (13%) were eligible for SWORD. The uptake of SWORD was 79% (n = 63/80) and the completion rate 73% (n = 46/63). SWORD was effective in reducing FCR (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.694). Regarding execution, a variability in the length, planning and number of treatment sessions was found between different settings. Adherence to the treatment manual's content was high (89%). Regarding acceptability, most patients were satisfied with SWORD (average 8.2/10) and psychologists valued the blended format. Psychologists reported SWORD was practical to deliver given their knowledge and skills. Although differences between settings were found, SWORD integrated well into practice. Referral for FCR and a reluctance to contract new eHealth providers were barriers for implementation. Conclusions: Despite differences between healthcare settings, the implementation of SWORD was evaluated well. The feasibility of SWORD in different settings should inform a national implementation strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is common and burdensome to patients, but often remains undetected. Oncology professionals report need for tools to improve FCR detection in routine care. Oncology care guidelines recommend the Distress Thermometer (DT) for distress screening, but it has not been validated for FCR. This study evaluated the capacity of the DT and accompanying problem list to detect FCR. Methods: Amalgamated data of two studies with 149 breast cancer and 74 colorectal cancer survivors were used. We evaluated the Dutch DT including the DT score, problem list fears item and emotional domain score using Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses. The Dutch Cancer Worry Scale‐6 (CWS‐6) was used as reference measure, with validated cut‐off scores ≥10 and ≥12 for high FCR. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values were calculated. Results: The DT score showed poor performance in discriminating between low and high FCR. The recommended cut‐off ≥4 had low sensitivity (65% for CWS‐6≥10; 72% for CWS‐6 ≥12) and specificity (67% and 58%). No other cut‐off had an acceptable combination of sensitivity and specificity. The fears item had low sensitivity (29% and 44.9%) and high specificity (95% and 94%). The emotional domain score had fair performance in discriminating between low and high FCR but there was no cut‐off with acceptable sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: The DT as currently recommended in oncology care guidelines is not suitable to effectively detect FCR in routine care. To improve patients access to psychosocial care, it should be investigated how FCR‐specific measures can be integrated in oncology practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the prevalence of unmet needs in post-treatment breast cancer survivors and identify sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables associated with reported unmet needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods: In this cross-sectional study, 430 post-treatment breast cancer survivors, ranging between 1 and 5 years after the procedure, completed the Cancer Survivors' Unmet Needs (CaSUN) questionnaire from September 2021 and January 2022. The multivariate logistic analysis identified factors associated with at least one reported unmet need in the total CaSUN scale and specific domains. Results: A total of 67% of survivors reported at least one unmet need. The most frequently reported unmet needs were the lack of accessible hospital parking (43%) and recurrence concerns (39.5%). The majority of reported unmet needs relate to comprehensive care (44%), followed by the psychological and emotional support domain (35.3%). Younger age (OR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.92-- 0.99; p < 0.001), three or more comorbidities (OR = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.11--0.71, p < 0.01), a lower quality of life (OR = 0.06, 95% CI = 0.01--0.47, p < 0.01) and low resilience (OR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.93--0.99) were associated with a high level of unmet needs in the multivariate regression model. Results are presented for factors associated with a high level of unmet needs for comprehensive cancer care and psychological and emotional support domain. Conclusion: A high prevalence found in our study could be attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic, where patients may have missed adequate follow-up care, although comparing to studies done in non-pandemic time is difficult. Family physicians should be more attentive toward younger cancer survivors and those with more comorbidities as both characteristics can be easily recognized in the family practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Approximately one in three women worldwide experiences intimate partner violence and abuse (IPVA) in her lifetime. Despite its frequent occurrence and severe consequences, women often refrain from seeking help. eHealth has the potential to remove some of the barriers women face in help seeking and disclosing. To guarantee the client-centeredness of an (online) intervention it is important to involve the target group and people with expertise in the development process. Therefore, we conducted an interview study with survivors and professionals, in order to assess needs, obstacles, and wishes with regard to an eHealth intervention for women experiencing IPVA. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 women (8 survivors and 8 professionals) between 22 and 52 years old, with varied experiences of IPVA and help. Qualitative data was analyzed using a grounded theory approach and open thematic coding. During analysis we identified a third stakeholder group within the study population: survivor-professionals, with both personal experiences of and professional knowledge on IPVA. All stakeholder groups largely agree on the priorities for an eHealth intervention: safety, acknowledgment, contact with fellow survivors, and help. Nevertheless, the groups offer different perspectives, with the survivor-professionals functioning as a bridge group between the survivors and professionals. The groups prioritize different topics. For example, survivors and survivor-professionals highlighted the essential need for safety, while professionals underlined the importance of acknowledgment. Survivor-professionals were the only ones to emphasize the importance of addressing various life domains. The experiences of professionals and survivors highlight a broad range of needs and potential obstacles for eHealth interventions. Consideration of these findings could improve the client-centeredness of existing and future (online) interventions for women experiencing IPVA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]