42
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Breast cancer survivors’ recollection of their illness and therapy seven years after enrolment into a randomised controlled clinical trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Little is known about the subjective experience of breast cancer survivors after primary treatment. However, these experiences are important because they shape their communication about their illness in everyday life, usage and acceptance of healthcare, and expectations of new generations of patients. The present study investigated this topic by combining qualitative and quantitative methods.

          Methods

          Breast cancer survivors in Bavaria, Germany were mailed a questionnaire up to seven years after enrolment into a randomised controlled clinical trial and start of their therapy. This enquired about their worst experiences during the breast cancer episode, positive aspects of the illness and any advice they would give to newly diagnosed patients. A category system for themes was systematically created and answers were categorised by two independent raters. Frequencies of key categories were then quantitatively analysed using descriptive statistics. In addition, local treating physicians gave their opinion on the response categories chosen by their patients.

          Results

          133 (80 %) of 166 eligible patients who survived up to seven years returned the questionnaire. The most prominent worst experience reported by survivors was psychological distress (i.e. anxiety, uncertainty; prevalence 38 %) followed by chemotherapy (25 %), and cancer diagnosis (18 %). Positive aspects of the illness were reported by 48 % with the most frequent including change in life priorities (50 %) and s ocial support (22 %). The most frequent advice survivors gave was fighting spirit (i.e. think positive, never give up; prevalence 42 %). Overall, physicians’ estimates of the frequency of these responses corresponded well with survivors’ answers.

          Conclusions

          Although physicians’ understanding of breast cancer patients was good, psychological distress and chemotherapy-related side effects were remembered as particularly burdensome by a substantial part of survivors. On the one hand, patients’ quality of life needs to be assessed repeatedly during medical follow-up to identify such specific complaints also including specific recommendations to the physician for targeted psychosocial and medical support. On the other hand the advices and positive aspects of the disease, reported by the survivors, can be used to promote positive ways of coping with the illness.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model.

          Patients confronted with a life-threatening or chronic disease are faced with the necessity to accommodate to their illness. An important mediator of this adaptation process is 'response shift' which involves changing internal standards, values and the conceptualization of quality of life (QOL). Integrating response shift into QOL research would allow a better understanding of how QOL is affected by changes in health status and would direct the development of reliable and valid measures for assessing changes in QOL. A theoretical model is proposed to clarify and predict changes in QOL as a result of the interaction of: (a) a catalyst, referring to changes in the respondent's health status; (b) antecedents, pertaining to stable or dispositional characteristics of the individual (e.g. personality); (c) mechanisms, encompassing behavioral, cognitive, or affective processes to accommodate the changes in health status (e.g. initiating social comparisons, reordering goals); and (d) response shift, defined as changes in the meaning of one's self-evaluation of QOL resulting from changes in internal standards, values, or conceptualization. A dynamic feedback loop aimed at maintaining or improving the perception of QOL is also postulated. This model is illustrated and the underlying assumptions are discussed. Future research directions are outlined that may further the investigation of response shift, by testing specific hypotheses and predictions about the QOL domains and the clinical and psychosocial conditions that would potentiate or prevent response shift effects.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: a systematic review of the literature.

            The purpose of this paper is to summarize the best evidence regarding the impact of providing patient-reported outcomes (PRO) information to health care professionals in daily clinical practice. Systematic review of randomized clinical trials (Medline, Cochrane Library; reference lists of previous systematic reviews; and requests to authors and experts in the field). Out of 1,861 identified references published between 1978 and 2007, 34 articles corresponding to 28 original studies proved eligible. Most trials (19) were conducted in primary care settings performed in the USA (21) and assessed adult patients (25). Information provided to professionals included generic health status (10), mental health (14), and other (6). Most studies suffered from methodologic limitations, including analysis that did not correspond with the unit of allocation. In most trials, the impact of PRO was limited. Fifteen of 23 studies (65%) measuring process of care observed at least one significant result favoring the intervention, as did eight of 17 (47%) that measured outcomes of care. Methodological concerns limit the strength of inference regarding the impact of providing PRO information to clinicians. Results suggest great heterogeneity of impact; contexts and interventions that will yield important benefits remain to be clearly defined.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Information needs and sources of information among cancer patients: a systematic review of research (1980-2003).

              Understanding what cancer patients need to know and from whom they receive information during the course of care is essential to ensuring quality care. We reviewed 112 articles published from 1980 to 2003 and developed a typology summarizing cancer patients' information needs and the sources from which they receive information. The majority of articles focused on information needs and sources during the diagnosis and treatment phase. Thus, the most frequent information need was treatment-related (38.1%). The most frequent information source was health professionals (27.3%). We examined patients' information needs and sources along the continuum of care and found that during diagnosis and treatment, information needs about the stage of disease, treatment options, and side-effects of treatment were prominent; during post-treatment, patients continued to need information about treatment, and information about recovery was also important. Future research should examine cancer patients' information needs and sources throughout their cancer journey.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                patricia.lindberg@ukr.de
                michael.koller@ukr.de
                brunhilde.steinger@ukr.de
                wilfried.lorenz@ukr.de
                J.C.Wyatt@leeds.ac.uk
                elisabeth.inwald@ukr.de
                monika.klinkhammer-schalke@ukr.de
                Journal
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2407
                29 July 2015
                29 July 2015
                2015
                : 15
                : 554
                Affiliations
                [ ]Tumor Center Regensburg e.V., An-Institute of the University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
                [ ]Center for Clinical Trials, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
                [ ]Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
                [ ]Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
                Article
                1573
                10.1186/s12885-015-1573-6
                4517565
                26219863
                88531458-7c4d-4f88-bdc8-e25542060110
                © Lindberg et al. 2015

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 30 October 2014
                : 21 July 2015
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                breast cancer,survivorship,qualitative analysis,quality of life,patient-physician agreement,complex intervention

                Comments

                Comment on this article