Comparing online support groups with psychoeducation versus psychoeducation alone for distressed breast cancer survivors: a randomized controlled trial

Mohamad Baydoun, M. Speca, J. Taylor-Brown, J. Stephen, K. Piedalue, Jill A. Turner, L. Carlson
{"title":"Comparing online support groups with psychoeducation versus psychoeducation alone for distressed breast cancer survivors: a randomized controlled trial","authors":"Mohamad Baydoun, M. Speca, J. Taylor-Brown, J. Stephen, K. Piedalue, Jill A. Turner, L. Carlson","doi":"10.1097/OR9.0000000000000058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background: Online support groups are one forum that can help breast cancer survivors cope with negative mood states, but little is known about their effects compared to self-administered psycho-educational interventions. This randomized controlled trial compared the effects of synchronous, text-based professionally led online support groups (OSGs) plus a psychoeducational coping skills training program, called Nucare, versus Nucare alone in distressed survivors of breast cancer. Methods: Consented participants were randomized to an OSG (90-minute once-weekly session for 12 weeks) plus home-based Nucare or a self-directed home-based Nucare intervention alone. The primary outcome was the Profile of Mood States-Short Form – Total Mood Disturbance score (POMS-TMD). Secondary outcomes included measures of anxiety, depression, coping, illness intrusiveness, and loneliness. Outcomes were measured before and after the intervention, and 3 months post-intervention (follow-up). Results: One hundred twenty-five stage I–III breast cancer survivors enrolled with a mean age of 53 years (OSG plus Nucare [n = 68]; Nucare alone [n = 57]). There was a significant improvement in POMS-TMD scores among the entire study sample during the intervention period (Cohen's d = 0.25, P = .002), which was maintained over follow-up. The group × time interactions on POMS-TMD over the intervention and follow-up periods were not significant (all Ps > .05), indicating neither group outperformed the other. Group x time interactions on three coping domains (positive reframing, use of instrumental support, self-blame) favored Nucare alone over OSG plus Nucare during the intervention period (Cohen's d ranged from 0.40 to 0.48), while group x time interactions over the follow-up period favored OSG plus Nucare over Nucare alone on loneliness (Cohen's d = 0.34) and one coping domain (self-blame) (Cohen's d = 0.58). Anxiety, depression, and illness intrusiveness were not significantly different between groups at any time point (all Ps > .05). Conclusion: OSGs plus Nucare were not found superior to Nucare alone in improving mood disturbance. Mood improvement among the entire sample indicates that regular use of either Nucare alone or in combination with OSGs may have the potential to ameliorate negative mood states in breast cancer survivors.","PeriodicalId":73915,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychosocial oncology research and practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychosocial oncology research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OR9.0000000000000058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Background: Online support groups are one forum that can help breast cancer survivors cope with negative mood states, but little is known about their effects compared to self-administered psycho-educational interventions. This randomized controlled trial compared the effects of synchronous, text-based professionally led online support groups (OSGs) plus a psychoeducational coping skills training program, called Nucare, versus Nucare alone in distressed survivors of breast cancer. Methods: Consented participants were randomized to an OSG (90-minute once-weekly session for 12 weeks) plus home-based Nucare or a self-directed home-based Nucare intervention alone. The primary outcome was the Profile of Mood States-Short Form – Total Mood Disturbance score (POMS-TMD). Secondary outcomes included measures of anxiety, depression, coping, illness intrusiveness, and loneliness. Outcomes were measured before and after the intervention, and 3 months post-intervention (follow-up). Results: One hundred twenty-five stage I–III breast cancer survivors enrolled with a mean age of 53 years (OSG plus Nucare [n = 68]; Nucare alone [n = 57]). There was a significant improvement in POMS-TMD scores among the entire study sample during the intervention period (Cohen's d = 0.25, P = .002), which was maintained over follow-up. The group × time interactions on POMS-TMD over the intervention and follow-up periods were not significant (all Ps > .05), indicating neither group outperformed the other. Group x time interactions on three coping domains (positive reframing, use of instrumental support, self-blame) favored Nucare alone over OSG plus Nucare during the intervention period (Cohen's d ranged from 0.40 to 0.48), while group x time interactions over the follow-up period favored OSG plus Nucare over Nucare alone on loneliness (Cohen's d = 0.34) and one coping domain (self-blame) (Cohen's d = 0.58). Anxiety, depression, and illness intrusiveness were not significantly different between groups at any time point (all Ps > .05). Conclusion: OSGs plus Nucare were not found superior to Nucare alone in improving mood disturbance. Mood improvement among the entire sample indicates that regular use of either Nucare alone or in combination with OSGs may have the potential to ameliorate negative mood states in breast cancer survivors.
比较在线支持团体与心理教育与单独心理教育对痛苦的乳腺癌幸存者:一项随机对照试验
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信