在现实世界的实践环境中,最佳证据癌症痛苦管理的临床效果。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Shawna L Ehlers, Janae L Kirsch, Elizabeth L Kacel, Lisa M Gudenkauf, Sherrie M Hanna, Eleshia J Morrison, Jill Snuggerud, Jeffrey P Staab, Katharine A R Price, Andrea E Wahner Hendrickson, Carrie Bronars, Kristine A Donovan, Deanna Hofschulte, Holly C Edwards, Kathryn J Ruddy
{"title":"在现实世界的实践环境中,最佳证据癌症痛苦管理的临床效果。","authors":"Shawna L Ehlers, Janae L Kirsch, Elizabeth L Kacel, Lisa M Gudenkauf, Sherrie M Hanna, Eleshia J Morrison, Jill Snuggerud, Jeffrey P Staab, Katharine A R Price, Andrea E Wahner Hendrickson, Carrie Bronars, Kristine A Donovan, Deanna Hofschulte, Holly C Edwards, Kathryn J Ruddy","doi":"10.1093/tbm/ibaf030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite 40 years of evidence supporting psychosocial interventions as a component of comprehensive cancer care, patients continue to report vast unmet psychosocial needs and distress. Cognitive behavioral therapies for cancer distress (CBT-C) are the most rigorously tested class of psychosocial interventions for cancer care.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To report clinical effectiveness outcomes of cancer-related distress and self-efficacy following implementation of best-evidence CBT-C, adapted for a real-world, billable practice setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who completed group-delivered, CBT-C (10 intervention hours, 5 sessions) in the practice setting were invited to enroll in a research study to document cancer distress across the year following CBT-C. Participants (n = 65) were primarily middle-aged (mean 50.5 years, 17% were young adults ≤40 years), female, and White. Analyses utilized mixed linear models with intent-to-treat procedures. Given group delivery and social skills training content within CBT-C, social self-efficacy was assessed as a potential treatment mechanism.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Distress decreased across the year following CBT-C (mean score change of 20 points for YAs, 6 points for non-YAs), with statistically significant age x time effects. Within-person improvements in social self-efficacy scores were related to reductions in cancer distress, including distress subscales of intrusive thoughts, avoidant coping, and hyperarousal. The model explained 76.6% of the total variance in cancer distress.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates the effective translation of CBT-C from controlled research trials to the practice setting. CBT-C effectiveness within a mixed-cancer population and relatively rural region of the US is also supported. CBT-C can be effectively translated to the practice settings for which it is intended.</p>","PeriodicalId":48679,"journal":{"name":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12203546/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical effectiveness of best-evidence cancer distress management in a real-world practice setting.\",\"authors\":\"Shawna L Ehlers, Janae L Kirsch, Elizabeth L Kacel, Lisa M Gudenkauf, Sherrie M Hanna, Eleshia J Morrison, Jill Snuggerud, Jeffrey P Staab, Katharine A R Price, Andrea E Wahner Hendrickson, Carrie Bronars, Kristine A Donovan, Deanna Hofschulte, Holly C Edwards, Kathryn J Ruddy\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/tbm/ibaf030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite 40 years of evidence supporting psychosocial interventions as a component of comprehensive cancer care, patients continue to report vast unmet psychosocial needs and distress. Cognitive behavioral therapies for cancer distress (CBT-C) are the most rigorously tested class of psychosocial interventions for cancer care.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To report clinical effectiveness outcomes of cancer-related distress and self-efficacy following implementation of best-evidence CBT-C, adapted for a real-world, billable practice setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who completed group-delivered, CBT-C (10 intervention hours, 5 sessions) in the practice setting were invited to enroll in a research study to document cancer distress across the year following CBT-C. Participants (n = 65) were primarily middle-aged (mean 50.5 years, 17% were young adults ≤40 years), female, and White. Analyses utilized mixed linear models with intent-to-treat procedures. Given group delivery and social skills training content within CBT-C, social self-efficacy was assessed as a potential treatment mechanism.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Distress decreased across the year following CBT-C (mean score change of 20 points for YAs, 6 points for non-YAs), with statistically significant age x time effects. Within-person improvements in social self-efficacy scores were related to reductions in cancer distress, including distress subscales of intrusive thoughts, avoidant coping, and hyperarousal. The model explained 76.6% of the total variance in cancer distress.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates the effective translation of CBT-C from controlled research trials to the practice setting. CBT-C effectiveness within a mixed-cancer population and relatively rural region of the US is also supported. CBT-C can be effectively translated to the practice settings for which it is intended.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational Behavioral Medicine\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12203546/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational Behavioral Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaf030\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaf030","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管有40年的证据支持心理社会干预作为综合癌症治疗的一个组成部分,但患者仍然报告大量未满足的心理社会需求和痛苦。癌症痛苦的认知行为疗法(CBT-C)是癌症治疗中经过最严格测试的社会心理干预措施。目的:报告实施最佳证据CBT-C后癌症相关痛苦和自我效能的临床效果结果,适用于现实世界的可计费实践设置。方法:在实践环境中完成了小组交付的CBT-C(10个干预小时,5个疗程)的患者被邀请参加一项研究,以记录CBT-C后一年的癌症困扰。参与者(n = 65)主要为中年人(平均50.5岁,17%为≤40岁的年轻人)、女性和白人。分析使用混合线性模型与意向治疗程序。考虑到CBT-C中的群体交付和社会技能训练内容,社会自我效能被评估为潜在的治疗机制。结果:在CBT-C后的一年中,焦虑情绪有所下降(年龄为20分,非年龄为6分),具有统计学意义的年龄x时间效应。个人社会自我效能得分的提高与癌症痛苦的减少有关,包括侵入性思想、回避性应对和过度觉醒的痛苦分量表。该模型解释了癌症困扰总方差的76.6%。结论:本研究证明了CBT-C从对照研究试验到实践环境的有效转化。CBT-C在美国混合癌症人群和相对农村地区的有效性也得到了支持。CBT-C可以有效地转化为它所针对的实践环境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical effectiveness of best-evidence cancer distress management in a real-world practice setting.

Background: Despite 40 years of evidence supporting psychosocial interventions as a component of comprehensive cancer care, patients continue to report vast unmet psychosocial needs and distress. Cognitive behavioral therapies for cancer distress (CBT-C) are the most rigorously tested class of psychosocial interventions for cancer care.

Purpose: To report clinical effectiveness outcomes of cancer-related distress and self-efficacy following implementation of best-evidence CBT-C, adapted for a real-world, billable practice setting.

Methods: Patients who completed group-delivered, CBT-C (10 intervention hours, 5 sessions) in the practice setting were invited to enroll in a research study to document cancer distress across the year following CBT-C. Participants (n = 65) were primarily middle-aged (mean 50.5 years, 17% were young adults ≤40 years), female, and White. Analyses utilized mixed linear models with intent-to-treat procedures. Given group delivery and social skills training content within CBT-C, social self-efficacy was assessed as a potential treatment mechanism.

Results: Distress decreased across the year following CBT-C (mean score change of 20 points for YAs, 6 points for non-YAs), with statistically significant age x time effects. Within-person improvements in social self-efficacy scores were related to reductions in cancer distress, including distress subscales of intrusive thoughts, avoidant coping, and hyperarousal. The model explained 76.6% of the total variance in cancer distress.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates the effective translation of CBT-C from controlled research trials to the practice setting. CBT-C effectiveness within a mixed-cancer population and relatively rural region of the US is also supported. CBT-C can be effectively translated to the practice settings for which it is intended.

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
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Translational Behavioral Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Translational Behavioral Medicine publishes content that engages, informs, and catalyzes dialogue about behavioral medicine among the research, practice, and policy communities. TBM began receiving an Impact Factor in 2015 and currently holds an Impact Factor of 2.989. TBM is one of two journals published by the Society of Behavioral Medicine. The Society of Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary organization of clinicians, educators, and scientists dedicated to promoting the study of the interactions of behavior with biology and the environment, and then applying that knowledge to improve the health and well-being of individuals, families, communities, and populations.
×
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