Literature DB >> 16643264

Does routine assessment and real-time feedback improve cancer patients' psychosocial well-being?

A Boyes1, S Newell, A Girgis, P McElduff, R Sanson-Fisher.   

Abstract

This study examined the effectiveness of giving medical oncologists immediate feedback about cancer patients' self-reported psychosocial well-being in reducing those patients' levels of anxiety, depression, perceived needs and physical symptoms. Cancer patients attending one cancer centre for their first visit were allocated to intervention (n = 42) or control (n = 38) groups. All patients completed a computerized survey assessing their psychosocial well-being while waiting to see the oncologist. Intervention patients' responses were immediately scored and summary reports were placed in each patient's file for follow-up. A total of 48 participants (25 intervention and 23 control) completed the survey four times. Intervention patients who reported a debilitating physical symptom at visit 2 were significantly less likely to report a debilitating physical symptom at visit 3 compared with control patients (OR = 2.8, P = 0.04). Reductions in levels of anxiety, depression and perceived needs among intervention patients were not significantly different to control patients. Repeated collection and immediate feedback of patient-reported health information to oncologists has potential to improve patients' symptom control, but has little impact upon emotional well-being, including those at high risk. Future research should consider providing the feedback to other health professionals and patients, and monitor the impact on the process of individual patient care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16643264     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2005.00633.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)        ISSN: 0961-5423            Impact factor:   2.520


  45 in total

1.  The course of anxiety, depression and unmet needs in survivors of diffuse large B cell lymphoma and multiple myeloma in the early survivorship period.

Authors:  Devesh Oberoi; Victoria White; John Seymour; H Miles Prince; Simon Harrison; Michael Jefford; Ingrid Winship; David Hill; Damien Bolton; Anne Kay; Jeremy Millar; Nicole Wong Doo; Graham Giles
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 4.442

2.  Indigenous cancer patient and staff attitudes towards unmet needs screening using the SCNAT-IP.

Authors:  G Garvey; B Thewes; V F Y He; E Davis; A Girgis; P C Valery; K Giam; A Hocking; J Jackson; V Jones; D Yip
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-05-24       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Completing a Questionnaire at Home Prior to Needs Assessment in General Practice: A Qualitative Study of Cancer Patients' Experience.

Authors:  Susanne Thayssen; Dorte Gilså Hansen; Jens Søndergaard; Mette Terp Høybye; Palle Mark Christensen; Helle Ploug Hansen
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 4.  A review and recommendations for optimal outcome measures of anxiety, depression and general distress in studies evaluating psychosocial interventions for English-speaking adults with heterogeneous cancer diagnoses.

Authors:  Tim Luckett; Phyllis N Butow; Madeleine T King; Mayumi Oguchi; Gaynor Heading; Nadine A Hackl; Nicole Rankin; Melanie A Price
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-07-02       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Effects of a computer-supported interactive tailored patient assessment tool on patient care, symptom distress, and patients' need for symptom management support: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Cornelia M Ruland; Harald H Holte; Jo Røislien; Cathy Heaven; Glenys A Hamilton; Jørn Kristiansen; Heidi Sandbaek; Stein O Kvaløy; Line Hasund; Misoo C Ellison
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 6.  Patient-reported outcome use in oncology: a systematic review of the impact on patient-clinician communication.

Authors:  L Y Yang; D S Manhas; A F Howard; R A Olson
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-08-28       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 7.  Unmet psychosocial needs in haematological cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  B Swash; N Hulbert-Williams; R Bramwell
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-01-25       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  An analysis of the distress thermometer problem list and distress in patients with cancer.

Authors:  Lisa VanHoose; Lora L Black; Kimberly Doty; Dory Sabata; Philip Twumasi-Ankrah; Sarah Taylor; Rhonda Johnson
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 3.603

9.  Feasibility and acceptance of electronic quality of life assessment in general practice: an implementation study.

Authors:  Anja Rogausch; Jörg Sigle; Anna Seibert; Sabine Thüring; Michael M Kochen; Wolfgang Himmel
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2009-06-03       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  Logistic feasibility of health related quality of life measurement in clinical practice: results of a prospective study in a large population of chronic liver patients.

Authors:  Jolie J Gutteling; Jan J V Busschbach; Robert A de Man; Anne-Sophie E Darlington
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2008-11-10       Impact factor: 3.186

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.