Search

Background: We investigated the need for additional professional support and associated factors in patients (pts) at initiation and in the course of in- and outpatient specialist palliative care (I-SPC/O-SPC). Methods: Pts entering an urban SPC network consecutively completed questionnaires on psychosocial/spiritual problems and support needs within 72 h (T0) as well as within the first 6 weeks (T1) of SPC. Hierarchical linear regression analysis was used to investigate the impact of sociodemographic / disease-related variables, psychological / physical burden, social support, and SPC setting on the extent of support needs. Results: Four hundred twenty-five pts (70 years, 48% female, 91% cancer, 67% O-SPC) answered at T0, and 167 at T1. At T0, main problems related to transportation, usual activities, and dependency (83–89%). At T1, most prevalent problems also related to transportation and usual activities and additionally to light housework (82–86%). At T0, support needs were highest for transportation, light housework, and usual activities (35–41%). Cross-sectional comparisons of SPC settings revealed higher problem scores in O-SPC compared to I-SPC at T0 (p =.039), but not at T1. Support need scores were higher in O-SPC at T0 (p <.001), but lower at T1 (p =.039). Longitudinal analyses showed a decrease of support need scores over time, independent from the SPC setting. At T0, higher distress (p =.047), anxiety/depression (p <.001), physical symptom burden (p <.001) and I-SPC (p <.001) were associated with higher support need scores (at T1: only higher distress, p =.037). Conclusion: Need for additional professional psychosocial/spiritual support was identified in up to 40% of pts. with higher need at the beginning of O-SPC than of I-SPC. During SPC, this need decreased in both settings, but got lower in O-SPC than in I-SPC over time. Support need scores were not only associated with psychological, but also physical burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We aimed to determine whether the Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) therapy is superior to a non‐manualized supportive psycho‐oncological counselling intervention (SPI). Methods: Adult patients with advanced cancer and ≥9 points on the PHQ‐9 and/or ≥5 points on the DT were randomized to CALM or SPI. We hypothesized that CALM patients would report significantly less depression (primary outcome) on the BDI‐II and the PHQ‐9 6 months after baseline compared to SPI patients. Results: From 329 eligible patients, 206 participated (61.2% female; age: M = 57.9 [SD = 11.7]; 84.5% UICC IV stage). Of them, 99 were assigned to CALM and 107 to SPI. Intention‐to‐treat analyses revealed significantly less depressive symptoms at 6 months than at baseline (P <.001 for BDI‐II and PHQ‐9), but participants in the CALM and SPI group did not differ in depression severity (BDI‐II: P =.62, PHQ‐9: P =.998). Group differences on secondary outcomes were statistically not significant either. Conclusions: CALM therapy was associated with reduction in depressive symptoms over time but this improvement was not statistically significant different than that obtained within SPI group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACTObjective:The prevalence of depression as well as adjustment and anxiety disorders is high in advanced cancer patients, and research exploring intraindividual factors leading to high psychological distress is underrepresented. Cancer patients' feelings about security and trust in their healthcare providers have a significant influence on how they deal with their disease. The perception of social support is affected by patients' attachment styles and influences their reactions to feelings of dependency and loss of control. We therefore aimed to explore attachment and its association with psychological distress in patients with advanced cancer.Method: We obtained data from the baseline measurements of a randomized controlled trial in advanced cancer patients. Patients were sampled from the university medical centers of Hamburg and Leipzig, Germany. The main outcome measures included the Patient Health Questionnaire, the Death and Dying Distress Scale, the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale, and the Experience in Close Relationships Scale for assessing attachment insecurity.Results: A total of 162 patients were included. We found that 64% of patients were insecurely attached (fearful-avoidant 31%, dismissing 17%, and preoccupied 16%). A dismissing attachment style was associated with more physical symptoms but did not predict psychological distress. A fearful-avoidant attachment style significantly predicted higher death anxiety and depression, whereas preoccupied attachment predicted higher death anxiety only. Overall, insecure attachment contributed to the prediction of depression (10%) and death anxiety (14%).Significance Of Results: The concept of attachment plays a relevant role in advanced cancer patients' mental health. Healthcare providers can benefit from knowledge of advanced cancer patients' attachment styles and how they relate to specific mental distress. Developing a better understanding of patients' reactions to feelings of dependency and distressing emotions can help us to develop individually tailored advanced cancer care programs and psychotherapeutic interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Attachment insecurity refers to difficulty in trusting and relying on others in times of need. Its underlying factors attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance have been empirically associated with impaired coping in advanced cancer and, therefore, should be considered in individually tailored medical and psychosocial treatment.Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the German translation of the Brief Experiences in Close Relationships Scale (ECR-M16-G).Methods: We recruited 182 advanced cancer patients from outpatient psycho-oncology clinics of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf and the University Medical Center Leipzig, local and external cancer care facilities. We performed confirmatory factor analysis to replicate the higher order factor structure reported in previous research. We conducted item and reliability analysis, also correlation analysis, to examine concurrent validity.Results: One hundred fifty-eight patients completed the ECR-M16-G (women 61%, mean age 57.9, SD = 11.1). We replicated the factor structure with the subscales Attachment Anxiety and Attachment Avoidance as second-order factors and Worrying about relationships, Frustration about unavailability, Discomfort with close others, and Turning away from others as first-order factors. An adjusted model that interchanged factor loadings of items 4 and 10 showed good fit (Comparative Fit Index = 0.94, Non-Normed Fit Index = 0.93, root mean square error of approximation = 0.05). Subscales showed acceptable to good internal consistency (anxiety α = .81 and avoidance α = .78). Attachment insecurity (mean = 3.1, SD = 1.0) was positively associated with depression, anxiety, demoralization (P < 0.001), and symptom burden (P = 0.02) and negatively associated with spiritual well-being (P < 0.001).Conclusion: The ECR-M16-G is a valid and reliable measure of attachment insecurity in patients with advanced cancer and can be recommended as a tool for clinical care and further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Distress and anxiety about issues related to death and dying is commonly experienced in patients with advanced disease and a limited life expectancy.Objectives: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the German version of the Death and Dying Distress Scale (DADDS-G) in advanced cancer patients.Methods: We recruited advanced patients with mixed tumor entities (Union for International Cancer Control [UICC] Stage III/IV) treated in two German University Medical Centers during their outpatient treatment. After testing a preliminary version of the state-of-the-art translated original Death and Dying Distress Scale, we analyzed the psychometric properties of the shortened nine-item adapted DADDS-G using validated instruments measuring distress, anxiety, depression, fear of progression, and quality of life.Results: We obtained complete questionnaires from 77 of 93 patients with advanced cancer (response rate: 83%). Participants were mostly married or cohabiting (75%), well-educated, and both sexes were almost equally represented (52% men; mean age 58 years, SD = 12). The total mean DADDS-G score was 13.3 (SD = 8.5). Patients reported to be most distressed by the feeling of being a burden to others. The exploratory factor analysis led to one factor that accounted for more than 59% of the variance. The DADDS-G's internal consistency was excellent with Cronbach alpha = 0.91. The confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated a very good model fit. Death-related anxiety was significantly associated with distress, depression, anxiety, fear of progression, and lower quality of life (P < 0.001).Conclusion: Results provide further evidence that the DADDS-G is a valid and reliable instrument of high clinical relevance for use in patients with advanced cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]