接受和承诺治疗对乳腺癌患者药物决策和生活质量的可接受性:一个定性的过程评价

IF 3.5 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Sophie M. C. Green, Louise H. Hall, Rachel Ellison, Jane Clark, Hollie Wilkes, Suzanne Hartley, Jay Naik, Sarah Buckley, Charlotte Hirst, Sue Hartup, Richard D. Neal, Galina Velikova, Amanda Farrin, Michelle Collinson, Christopher D. Graham, Samuel G. Smith
{"title":"接受和承诺治疗对乳腺癌患者药物决策和生活质量的可接受性:一个定性的过程评价","authors":"Sophie M. C. Green,&nbsp;Louise H. Hall,&nbsp;Rachel Ellison,&nbsp;Jane Clark,&nbsp;Hollie Wilkes,&nbsp;Suzanne Hartley,&nbsp;Jay Naik,&nbsp;Sarah Buckley,&nbsp;Charlotte Hirst,&nbsp;Sue Hartup,&nbsp;Richard D. Neal,&nbsp;Galina Velikova,&nbsp;Amanda Farrin,&nbsp;Michelle Collinson,&nbsp;Christopher D. Graham,&nbsp;Samuel G. Smith","doi":"10.1111/bjhp.12802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) reduces breast cancer recurrence, but side effects and distress impact adherence. We co-designed an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention to support medication decision-making and quality of life in women prescribed AET (ACTION). In a qualitative process evaluation nested in the pilot trial, we aimed to elicit participant experiences of receipt and therapists experience of delivery of ACTION to enhance our understanding of acceptability.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Remote semi-structured interviews were conducted with women with breast cancer who received ACTION (<i>n</i> = 20) and trial therapists (<i>n</i> = 3).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Interviews were guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Rapid Assessment Procedure (RAP) sheets were completed after each interview to map responses onto TFA constructs, and sections of interviews were selectively transcribed. Individual RAP sheets were collated to identify key findings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>ACTION was generally liked, in particular, the group format (<i>affective attitude</i>). Participants and therapists felt ACTION was low effort, but therapists acknowledged the burden associated with trial procedures (<i>burden</i>). Participants generally felt able to engage with ACTION, and therapists felt they were able to deliver it (<i>self-efficacy</i>). The perceived effectiveness of ACTION on well-being was good, but was mixed for impact on treatment adherence (<i>perceived effectiveness</i>). Participants and therapists understood the aims of ACTION (<i>coherence</i>), and ACTION generally aligned with therapists' values (<i>ethicality</i>). Therapists questioned who would be most appropriate to deliver ACTION (<i>opportunity costs</i>).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>ACTION was acceptable to women with breast cancer and trial therapists. Rapid qualitative analysis can facilitate efficient process evaluations in time- and resource-limited contexts.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48161,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Health Psychology","volume":"30 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjhp.12802","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptability of acceptance and commitment therapy for medication-decision-making and quality of life in women with breast cancer: A qualitative process evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Sophie M. C. Green,&nbsp;Louise H. Hall,&nbsp;Rachel Ellison,&nbsp;Jane Clark,&nbsp;Hollie Wilkes,&nbsp;Suzanne Hartley,&nbsp;Jay Naik,&nbsp;Sarah Buckley,&nbsp;Charlotte Hirst,&nbsp;Sue Hartup,&nbsp;Richard D. Neal,&nbsp;Galina Velikova,&nbsp;Amanda Farrin,&nbsp;Michelle Collinson,&nbsp;Christopher D. Graham,&nbsp;Samuel G. Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjhp.12802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) reduces breast cancer recurrence, but side effects and distress impact adherence. We co-designed an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention to support medication decision-making and quality of life in women prescribed AET (ACTION). In a qualitative process evaluation nested in the pilot trial, we aimed to elicit participant experiences of receipt and therapists experience of delivery of ACTION to enhance our understanding of acceptability.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Design</h3>\\n \\n <p>Remote semi-structured interviews were conducted with women with breast cancer who received ACTION (<i>n</i> = 20) and trial therapists (<i>n</i> = 3).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Interviews were guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Rapid Assessment Procedure (RAP) sheets were completed after each interview to map responses onto TFA constructs, and sections of interviews were selectively transcribed. Individual RAP sheets were collated to identify key findings.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>ACTION was generally liked, in particular, the group format (<i>affective attitude</i>). Participants and therapists felt ACTION was low effort, but therapists acknowledged the burden associated with trial procedures (<i>burden</i>). Participants generally felt able to engage with ACTION, and therapists felt they were able to deliver it (<i>self-efficacy</i>). The perceived effectiveness of ACTION on well-being was good, but was mixed for impact on treatment adherence (<i>perceived effectiveness</i>). Participants and therapists understood the aims of ACTION (<i>coherence</i>), and ACTION generally aligned with therapists' values (<i>ethicality</i>). Therapists questioned who would be most appropriate to deliver ACTION (<i>opportunity costs</i>).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>ACTION was acceptable to women with breast cancer and trial therapists. Rapid qualitative analysis can facilitate efficient process evaluations in time- and resource-limited contexts.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Health Psychology\",\"volume\":\"30 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjhp.12802\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Health Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjhp.12802\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjhp.12802","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的辅助内分泌治疗(AET)降低乳腺癌复发率,但其副作用和困扰会影响依从性。我们共同设计了一项接受和承诺治疗(ACT)干预,以支持服用AET的女性的药物决策和生活质量(ACTION)。在一个定性的过程评估嵌套在试点试验中,我们的目的是引出参与者的经验接收和治疗师的经验提供行动,以提高我们对可接受性的理解。设计对接受了ACTION治疗的乳腺癌患者(n = 20)和试验治疗师(n = 3)进行远程半结构化访谈。方法采用可接受性理论框架(TFA)进行访谈。每次访谈后完成快速评估程序(RAP)表,将回答映射到TFA结构,并选择性地转录访谈部分。整理了个别RAP表,以确定主要发现。结果ACTION被普遍喜欢,尤其是分组形式(情感态度)。参与者和治疗师认为行动是低努力,但治疗师承认与试验程序相关的负担(负担)。参与者通常觉得能够参与行动,治疗师也觉得他们能够传递行动(自我效能感)。ACTION对幸福感的感知效果良好,但对治疗依从性的影响(感知效果)好坏参半。参与者和治疗师理解行动的目的(一致性),行动通常与治疗师的价值观(道德性)一致。治疗师质疑谁最适合提供行动(机会成本)。结论ACTION对乳腺癌患者和临床治疗人员是可接受的。快速定性分析可以在时间和资源有限的情况下促进有效的过程评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Acceptability of acceptance and commitment therapy for medication-decision-making and quality of life in women with breast cancer: A qualitative process evaluation

Objectives

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) reduces breast cancer recurrence, but side effects and distress impact adherence. We co-designed an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention to support medication decision-making and quality of life in women prescribed AET (ACTION). In a qualitative process evaluation nested in the pilot trial, we aimed to elicit participant experiences of receipt and therapists experience of delivery of ACTION to enhance our understanding of acceptability.

Design

Remote semi-structured interviews were conducted with women with breast cancer who received ACTION (n = 20) and trial therapists (n = 3).

Methods

Interviews were guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Rapid Assessment Procedure (RAP) sheets were completed after each interview to map responses onto TFA constructs, and sections of interviews were selectively transcribed. Individual RAP sheets were collated to identify key findings.

Results

ACTION was generally liked, in particular, the group format (affective attitude). Participants and therapists felt ACTION was low effort, but therapists acknowledged the burden associated with trial procedures (burden). Participants generally felt able to engage with ACTION, and therapists felt they were able to deliver it (self-efficacy). The perceived effectiveness of ACTION on well-being was good, but was mixed for impact on treatment adherence (perceived effectiveness). Participants and therapists understood the aims of ACTION (coherence), and ACTION generally aligned with therapists' values (ethicality). Therapists questioned who would be most appropriate to deliver ACTION (opportunity costs).

Conclusion

ACTION was acceptable to women with breast cancer and trial therapists. Rapid qualitative analysis can facilitate efficient process evaluations in time- and resource-limited contexts.

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
British Journal of Health Psychology
British Journal of Health Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
1.30%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The focus of the British Journal of Health Psychology is to publish original research on various aspects of psychology that are related to health, health-related behavior, and illness throughout a person's life. The journal specifically seeks articles that are based on health psychology theory or discuss theoretical matters within the field.
×
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