采用二元方法治疗慢性癌症相关疲劳:一项评估患者和伴侣需求、益处、障碍和偏好的混合方法研究

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Sophie I. van Dongen, Fabiola Müller, Rosalie A. M. van Woezik, Mariët Hagedoorn, Marije L. van der Lee
{"title":"采用二元方法治疗慢性癌症相关疲劳:一项评估患者和伴侣需求、益处、障碍和偏好的混合方法研究","authors":"Sophie I. van Dongen,&nbsp;Fabiola Müller,&nbsp;Rosalie A. M. van Woezik,&nbsp;Mariët Hagedoorn,&nbsp;Marije L. van der Lee","doi":"10.1155/ecc/8313220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><b>Introduction:</b> Chronic cancer-related fatigue (CCRF) is a common symptom among patients. Current therapies target the patient alone, while evidence suggests that targeting the dyad might be more beneficial.</p>\n <p><b>Method:</b> Using a mixed methods design, we conducted two studies that together aimed to provide more insight into the needs, benefits, barriers and preferences regarding a couples therapy for CCRF. In a qualitative study, we conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 patients and 10 partners with experience of CCRF care, followed by thematic analysis. In a subsequent quantitative study, a convenience sample of patients (<i>n</i> = 172) and partners (<i>n</i> = 55) completed an online survey developed based on the qualitative findings.</p>\n <p><b>Results:</b> In the qualitative study, both patients and partners expressed that a couples therapy could help them. Perceived benefits included empowerment of partners to support patients and improved couples communication. In the online survey, the need for a dyadic approach to CCRF therapy was confirmed by both patients (39%) and partners (91%). The benefits reported by most patients and partners were that partners could get attention for their own problems related to the patients’ cancer and fatigue (patients: 72%, partners: 86%) and receive advice on coping with fatigue (66% and 90%, respectively). Participants in both studies identified barriers, such as a fear of burdening partners with a couples therapy (50%). Partner involvement was considered desirable for most therapy elements (e.g., psychoeducation, contact with the therapist, exercises and relapse prevention). Yet, individual preferences varied widely.</p>\n <p><b>Conclusion:</b> Results of both studies support the potential acceptability of a couples therapy for CCRF among patients and partners. Based on divergent preferences, we determined that a couples therapy must provide flexibility regarding the degree, intensity and type of partner involvement. Dyadic psychoeducation can be used as a solid starting point to manage expectations and get relief from perceived barriers.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11953,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Cancer Care","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ecc/8313220","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adopting a Dyadic Approach to Treating Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue: A Mixed Methods Study to Assess Patients’ and Partners’ Needs, Benefits, Barriers and Preferences\",\"authors\":\"Sophie I. van Dongen,&nbsp;Fabiola Müller,&nbsp;Rosalie A. M. van Woezik,&nbsp;Mariët Hagedoorn,&nbsp;Marije L. van der Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/ecc/8313220\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n <p><b>Introduction:</b> Chronic cancer-related fatigue (CCRF) is a common symptom among patients. Current therapies target the patient alone, while evidence suggests that targeting the dyad might be more beneficial.</p>\\n <p><b>Method:</b> Using a mixed methods design, we conducted two studies that together aimed to provide more insight into the needs, benefits, barriers and preferences regarding a couples therapy for CCRF. In a qualitative study, we conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 patients and 10 partners with experience of CCRF care, followed by thematic analysis. In a subsequent quantitative study, a convenience sample of patients (<i>n</i> = 172) and partners (<i>n</i> = 55) completed an online survey developed based on the qualitative findings.</p>\\n <p><b>Results:</b> In the qualitative study, both patients and partners expressed that a couples therapy could help them. Perceived benefits included empowerment of partners to support patients and improved couples communication. In the online survey, the need for a dyadic approach to CCRF therapy was confirmed by both patients (39%) and partners (91%). The benefits reported by most patients and partners were that partners could get attention for their own problems related to the patients’ cancer and fatigue (patients: 72%, partners: 86%) and receive advice on coping with fatigue (66% and 90%, respectively). Participants in both studies identified barriers, such as a fear of burdening partners with a couples therapy (50%). Partner involvement was considered desirable for most therapy elements (e.g., psychoeducation, contact with the therapist, exercises and relapse prevention). Yet, individual preferences varied widely.</p>\\n <p><b>Conclusion:</b> Results of both studies support the potential acceptability of a couples therapy for CCRF among patients and partners. Based on divergent preferences, we determined that a couples therapy must provide flexibility regarding the degree, intensity and type of partner involvement. Dyadic psychoeducation can be used as a solid starting point to manage expectations and get relief from perceived barriers.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Cancer Care\",\"volume\":\"2025 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ecc/8313220\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Cancer Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/ecc/8313220\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Cancer Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/ecc/8313220","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

慢性癌症相关性疲劳(CCRF)是癌症患者的常见症状。目前的治疗方法仅针对患者,而有证据表明,针对二联体可能更有益。方法:采用混合方法设计,我们进行了两项研究,旨在更深入地了解夫妻治疗CCRF的需求、益处、障碍和偏好。在定性研究中,我们对10名患者和10名具有CCRF护理经验的合作伙伴进行了焦点小组和半结构化访谈,然后进行了主题分析。在随后的定量研究中,患者(n = 172)和伴侣(n = 55)的方便样本完成了基于定性研究结果的在线调查。结果:在定性研究中,患者和伴侣都表示夫妻治疗对他们有帮助。可感知的好处包括赋予伴侣支持患者的权力,以及改善夫妻沟通。在在线调查中,患者(39%)和伴侣(91%)都确认需要双重方法进行CCRF治疗。大多数患者和伴侣报告的好处是,伴侣可以关注他们自己与患者的癌症和疲劳有关的问题(患者:72%,伴侣:86%),并获得应对疲劳的建议(分别为66%和90%)。两项研究的参与者都发现了障碍,比如害怕给伴侣带来夫妻治疗的负担(50%)。伴侣参与被认为是大多数治疗要素(如心理教育、与治疗师接触、练习和复发预防)的理想选择。然而,个人偏好差异很大。结论:两项研究的结果支持CCRF患者和伴侣之间的潜在可接受性夫妻治疗。基于不同的偏好,我们确定夫妻治疗必须在伴侣参与的程度、强度和类型方面提供灵活性。二元心理教育可以作为一个坚实的起点来管理期望,并从感知障碍中解脱出来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Adopting a Dyadic Approach to Treating Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue: A Mixed Methods Study to Assess Patients’ and Partners’ Needs, Benefits, Barriers and Preferences

Adopting a Dyadic Approach to Treating Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue: A Mixed Methods Study to Assess Patients’ and Partners’ Needs, Benefits, Barriers and Preferences

Introduction: Chronic cancer-related fatigue (CCRF) is a common symptom among patients. Current therapies target the patient alone, while evidence suggests that targeting the dyad might be more beneficial.

Method: Using a mixed methods design, we conducted two studies that together aimed to provide more insight into the needs, benefits, barriers and preferences regarding a couples therapy for CCRF. In a qualitative study, we conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 patients and 10 partners with experience of CCRF care, followed by thematic analysis. In a subsequent quantitative study, a convenience sample of patients (n = 172) and partners (n = 55) completed an online survey developed based on the qualitative findings.

Results: In the qualitative study, both patients and partners expressed that a couples therapy could help them. Perceived benefits included empowerment of partners to support patients and improved couples communication. In the online survey, the need for a dyadic approach to CCRF therapy was confirmed by both patients (39%) and partners (91%). The benefits reported by most patients and partners were that partners could get attention for their own problems related to the patients’ cancer and fatigue (patients: 72%, partners: 86%) and receive advice on coping with fatigue (66% and 90%, respectively). Participants in both studies identified barriers, such as a fear of burdening partners with a couples therapy (50%). Partner involvement was considered desirable for most therapy elements (e.g., psychoeducation, contact with the therapist, exercises and relapse prevention). Yet, individual preferences varied widely.

Conclusion: Results of both studies support the potential acceptability of a couples therapy for CCRF among patients and partners. Based on divergent preferences, we determined that a couples therapy must provide flexibility regarding the degree, intensity and type of partner involvement. Dyadic psychoeducation can be used as a solid starting point to manage expectations and get relief from perceived barriers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Cancer Care
European Journal of Cancer Care 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.80%
发文量
213
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Cancer Care aims to encourage comprehensive, multiprofessional cancer care across Europe and internationally. It publishes original research reports, literature reviews, guest editorials, letters to the Editor and special features on current issues affecting the care of cancer patients. The Editor welcomes contributions which result from team working or collaboration between different health and social care providers, service users, patient groups and the voluntary sector in the areas of: - Primary, secondary and tertiary care for cancer patients - Multidisciplinary and service-user involvement in cancer care - Rehabilitation, supportive, palliative and end of life care for cancer patients - Policy, service development and healthcare evaluation in cancer care - Psychosocial interventions for patients and family members - International perspectives on cancer care
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信