Empowering Prostate Cancer Patients and Their Wife’s : Assessing Early Self-Management Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt2024.1325Keywords:
Needs Assessment, Medical Informatics, Randomized Controlled TrialAbstract
Introduction: Prostate cancer stands out as the highest prevalent tumour among males, with an impressive 92% survival rate beyond the initial 5 years of diagnosis. The study aimed to evaluate Whether information offered to men diagnosed with prostate tumors and their wife’s immediately after diagnosis met their needs. It also sought to evaluate the satisfaction levels of patients and Their wife’s discussing the received information. Methods: Survey data collected prior to the intervention from a pilot randomized controlled experiment involving 41 prostate cancer patients and their wife’s . The focus was on examining the psychosocial concerns and needs of the participants before the implementation of a self-self-reliant managing skills involvement. Results: Patient role and theirs wife’s shared common psychosocial concerns such as emotional management, future uncertainties, and a perceived loss of control. Information provided to both groups primarily focused on tests and treatment options. In comparison to patients, their wife’s indicated a notable disparity in the amount of information received regarding support essential services (P = 0.02) and strategies for self-care (P = 0.02). Furthermore, their wives reported much poorer satisfaction with the information they got (P = P = 0.01). Conclusion: Patients and their wife’s often receive routine medical information, but there is a need for more extensive details on psychosocial aspects of cancer. Despite an increasing acknowledgment of the informational needs of their wife’s , these needs remain unmet
References
1. Costello AJ. Considering the role of radical prostatectomy in 21st century prostate cancer care. Nat Rev Urol. 2020;17(3):177–88. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-020-0287-y
2. Langelier DM. The Role of Exercise on Masculinity, Body Image, and Quality of Life in Men with Prostate Cancer. A Mixed Methods Study. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4178-1
3. Buote R. Understanding men’s experiences with prostate cancer stigma: a qualitative study. Number 5/September 2020. 2020;47(5):577–85. https://doi.org/10.1188/20.onf.577-585
4. Marttila E, Koivula A, Räsänen P. Does excessive social media use decrease subjective well-being? A longitudinal analysis of the relationship between problematic use, loneliness and life satisfaction. Telematics and Informatics. 2021;59:101556.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2020.101556
5. Clair R, Gordon M, Kroon M, Reilly C. The effects of social isolation on well-being and life satisfaction during pandemic. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2021;8(1).
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00710-3
6. Bashian HM, Caskie GIL. Older Adult Health Condition as a Moderator of How Middle-Aged Adults’ Ageist Attitudes and Aging Anxiety Relate to Their Compassion for and Emotional Distance from Older Adults. Exp Aging Res. 2023;49(3):252–70.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0361073x.2022.2091329
7. Gall TL, Bilodeau C. The role of relationship with God in couples’ adjustment to the threat of breast cancer. Psycholog Relig Spiritual. 2018;10(4):375.
https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000224
8. Matthew A, Lutzky-Cohen N, Jamnicky L, Currie K, Gentile A, Mina DS, et al. The prostate cancer rehabilitation clinic: a biopsychosocial clinic for sexual dysfunction after radical prostatectomy. Current Oncology. 2018;25(6):393–402. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.25.4111
9. Prashar J, Schartau P, Murray E. Supportive care needs of men with prostate cancer: A systematic review update. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2022;31(2):e13541.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13541
10. Vos JAM, Duineveld LAM, van Miltenburg VE, Henselmans I, van Weert HCPM, van Asselt KM. Addressing colon cancer patients’ needs during follow-up consultations at the outpatient clinic: a multicenter qualitative observational study. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2022;30(10):7893–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07222-z
11. Wollersheim BM, Van Asselt KM, Pos FJ, Akdemir E, Crouse S, Van Der Poel HG, et al. Specialist versus primary care prostate cancer follow-up: A process evaluation of a randomized controlled trial. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(13):3166.
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14133166
12. Wollersheim BM, van Der Poel HG, Van Asselt KM, Pos FJ, Tillier CN, Akdemir E, et al. Quality of early prostate cancer follow-up care from the patients’ perspective. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2022;30(12):10077–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07396-6
13. Beckjord EB, Arora NK, McLaughlin W, Oakley-Girvan I, Hamilton AS, Hesse BW. Health-related information needs in a large and diverse sample of adult cancer survivors: implications for cancer care. Journal of Cancer Survivorship. 2008;2:179–89.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-008-0055-0
14. Collaço N, Rivas C, Matheson L, Nayoan J, Wagland R, Alexis O, et al. Prostate cancer and the impact on couples: a qualitative metasynthesis. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2018;26:1703–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4134-0
15. Garos S, Kluck A, Aronoff D. Prostate cancer patients and their partners: differences in satisfaction indices and psychological variables. J Sex Med. 2007;4(5):1394–403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00545.x
16. Varner S, Lloyd G, Ranby KW, Callan S, Robertson C, Lipkus IM. Illness uncertainty, partner support, and quality of life: a dyadic longitudinal investigation of couples facing prostate cancer. Psychooncology. 2019;28(11):2188–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5205
17. Howell DD. Supported self-management for cancer survivors to address long-term biopsychosocial consequences of cancer and treatment to optimize living well. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2018;12(1):92–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/spc.0000000000000329
18. Kim SH, Park S, Kim SJ, Hur MH, Lee BG, Han MS. Self-management needs of breast cancer survivors after treatment: results from a focus group interview. Cancer Nurs. 2020;43(1):78–85. https://doi.org/10.1097/ncc.0000000000000641
19. Borthwick C, O’Connor R, Kennedy L. Psychological predictors of seasonal influenza vaccination uptake among adults with a high-risk physical health condition: a systematic review. Psychol Health. 2021;36(2):214–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2020.1772971
20. Rodrigues NG, Han CQY, Su Y, Klainin‐Yobas P, Wu XV. Psychological impacts and online interventions of social isolation amongst older adults during COVID‐19 pandemic: A scoping review. J Adv Nurs. 2022;78(3):609–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15063
21. Chambers SK, Hyde MK, Laurie K, Legg M, Frydenberg M, Davis ID, et al. Experiences of Australian men diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer: a qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2018;8(2):e019917. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019917
22. Ettridge KA, Bowden JA, Chambers SK, Smith DP, Murphy M, Evans SM, et al. “Prostate cancer is far more hidden…”: Perceptions of stigma, social isolation and help‐seeking among men with prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2018;27(2):e12790.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12790
23. McIntosh M, Opozda MJ, Evans H, Finlay A, Galvao DA, Chambers SK, et al. A systematic review of the unmet supportive care needs of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Psychooncology. 2019;28(12):2307–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5262
24. Alasmari A, Zhou L. Share to seek: The effects of disease complexity on health information–seeking behavior. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(3):e21642.
25. Chi Y, He D, Jeng W. Laypeople’s source selection in online health information‐seeking process. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2020;71(12):1484–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24343
26. Savolainen R. Information‐seeking processes as temporal developments: comparison of stage‐based and cyclic approaches. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2018;69(6):787–97.
https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24003
27. Meesala A, Paul J. Service quality, consumer satisfaction and loyalty in hospitals: Thinking for the future. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. 2018;40:261–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.10.011
28. Shim M, Jo HS. What quality factors matter in enhancing the perceived benefits of online health information sites? Application of the updated DeLone and McLean Information Systems Success Model. Int J Med Inform. 2020;137:104093.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104093
29. Aunan ST, Wallgren GC, Hansen BS. The value of information and support; Experiences among patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Nurs. 2021;30(11–12):1653–64.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15719
30. Covvey JR, Kamal KM, Gorse EE, Mehta Z, Dhumal T, Heidari E, et al. Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in oncology: a systematic review of the literature. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2019;27:1613–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-04675-7
31. Kelly MP, Calkins TE, Culvern C, Kogan M, Della Valle CJ. Inpatient versus outpatient hip and knee arthroplasty: which has higher patient satisfaction? J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(11):3402–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.07.025
32. Loscalzo M, Clark K, Dillehunt J, Rinehart R, Strowbridge R, Smith D. SupportScreen: a model for improving patient outcomes. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 2010;8(4):496–504. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2010.0036
33. Arraras JI, Greimel E, Sezer O, Chie WC, Bergenmar M, Costantini A, et al. An international validation study of the EORTC QLQ-INFO25 questionnaire: an instrument to assess the information given to cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(15):2726–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2010.06.118
34. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67(6):361–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x
35. Weiss DS. The impact of event scale: revised. In: Cross-cultural assessment of psychological trauma and PTSD. Springer; 2007. p. 219–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-70990-1_10
36. Richardson J, Khan M, Iezzi A, Sinha K, Mihalopoulos C, Herrman H, et al. The AQoL-8D (PsyQoL) MAU Instrument: Overview September 2009. Centre for Health Economics, Monash University. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0686-8
37. Busby DM, Christensen C, Crane DR, Larson JH. A revision of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale for use with distressed and nondistressed couples: Construct hierarchy and multidimensional scales. J Marital Fam Ther. 1995;21(3):289–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.1995.tb00163.x
38. Kessler TA. The cognitive appraisal of health scale: Development and psychometric evaluation. Res Nurs Health. 1998;21(1):73–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-240x(199802)21:1<73::aid-nur8>3.0.co;2-q
39. Mishel MH. The measurement of uncertainty in illness. Nurs Res. 1981;30(5):258–63.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198109000-00002
40. Wolf MS, Chang CH, Davis T, Makoul G. Development and validation of the Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy scale for cancer (CASE-cancer). Patient Educ Couns. 2005;57(3):333–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2004.09.005
41. Weitzner MA, Jacobsen PB, Wagner H, Friedland J, Cox C. The Caregiver Quality of Life Index–Cancer (CQOLC) scale: development and validation of an instrument to measure quality of life of the family caregiver of patients with cancer. Quality of life Research. 1999;8:55–63.
https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1026407010614
42. Lambert SD, Yoon H, Ellis KR, Northouse L. Measuring appraisal during advanced cancer: Psychometric testing of the appraisal of caregiving scale. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98(5):633–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2015.01.009
43. Majumder K, Brandberg Y, Johansson H, Nilsson S, Bergenmar M. Less satisfaction with information in patients with prostate cancer treated with surgery and salvage radiotherapy compared with patients treated with curative radiotherapy alone, despite similar health-related quality of life. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2014;12(3):e71–82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2013.11.001
44. Carlozzi NE, Ianni PA, Tulsky DS, Brickell TA, Lange RT, French LM, et al. Understanding health-related quality of life in caregivers of civilians and service members/veterans with traumatic brain injury: Establishing the reliability and validity of PROMIS fatigue and sleep disturbance item banks. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(4):S102–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.05.020
45. Oechsle K, Ullrich A, Marx G, Benze G, Wowretzko F, Zhang Y, et al. Prevalence and predictors of distress, anxiety, depression, and quality of life in bereaved family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®. 2020;37(3):201–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049909119872755
46. Starr LT, Washington K, McPhillips M V, Pitzer K, Demiris G, Oliver DP. Insomnia symptoms among hospice family caregivers: Prevalence and association with caregiver mental and physical health, quality of life, and caregiver burden. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®. 2023;40(5):517–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091221105882
47. Galbraith ME, Pedro LW, Jaffe AR, Allen TL. Describing health-related outcomes for couples experiencing prostate cancer: differences and similarities. In: Oncology nursing forum. Citeseer; 2008. https://doi.org/10.1188/08.onf.794-801
48. Chen Z, Chan ICC. Smart cities and quality of life: a quantitative analysis of citizens’ support for smart city development. Information Technology & People. 2023;36(1):263–85.
https://doi.org/10.1108/itp-07-2021-0577
49. Moloney W, Fieldes J, Jacobs S. An integrative review of how healthcare organizations can support hospital nurses to thrive at work. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(23):8757.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17238757
50. Echlin KN, Rees CE. Information needs and information-seeking behaviors of men with prostate cancer and their partners: a review of the literature. Cancer Nurs. 2002;25(1):35–41.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Ahmad Mahmoud Saleh (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
