PURPOSE: The aim of the current research was to characterize psychological adjustment among partners of women at high risk of developing breast/ovarian cancer and to explore the relationship between women's and partners' adjustment. METHODS: A study of 95 unaffected at-risk women and 95 partners was carried out using mailed, self-administered questionnaires with validated measures of psychological outcome. RESULTS: Elevated levels of distress were noted in up to 10% of partners. High monitoring coping style and greater perceived breast cancer risk for their wife were associated with higher distress levels for partners. However, communicating openly with their wife and the occurrence of a recent cancer-related event in the woman's family were related to lower distress for partners. Partners' cancer-specific distress was positively related to their wives' distress. CONCLUSION: Among partners with elevated levels of distress, the ability to provide effective support to the at-risk women and participate appropriately in their decision making may be compromised. These partners are likely to benefit from targeted clinical interventions designed to reduce their distress levels. The findings emphasize the importance of considering partners of at-risk women in service provision and highlight the need for partners to obtain information and support specifically tailored to their needs.
PURPOSE: The aim of the current research was to characterize psychological adjustment among partners of women at high risk of developing breast/ovarian cancer and to explore the relationship between women's and partners' adjustment. METHODS: A study of 95 unaffected at-risk women and 95 partners was carried out using mailed, self-administered questionnaires with validated measures of psychological outcome. RESULTS: Elevated levels of distress were noted in up to 10% of partners. High monitoring coping style and greater perceived breast cancer risk for their wife were associated with higher distress levels for partners. However, communicating openly with their wife and the occurrence of a recent cancer-related event in the woman's family were related to lower distress for partners. Partners' cancer-specific distress was positively related to their wives' distress. CONCLUSION: Among partners with elevated levels of distress, the ability to provide effective support to the at-risk women and participate appropriately in their decision making may be compromised. These partners are likely to benefit from targeted clinical interventions designed to reduce their distress levels. The findings emphasize the importance of considering partners of at-risk women in service provision and highlight the need for partners to obtain information and support specifically tailored to their needs.
Authors: Rachel Shapira; Erin Turbitt; Lori H Erby; Barbara B Biesecker; William M P Klein; Gillian W Hooker Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Darren Mays; Tiffani A DeMarco; George Luta; Beth N Peshkin; Andrea F Patenaude; Katherine A Schneider; Judy E Garber; Kenneth P Tercyak Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2013-06-24 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Arnethea L Sutton; Alejandra Hurtado-de-Mendoza; John Quillin; Lisa Rubinsak; Sarah M Temkin; Tamas Gal; Vanessa B Sheppard Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2019-11-27 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Pedro Gomes; Giada Pietrabissa; Eunice R Silva; João Silva; Paula Mena Matos; Maria Emília Costa; Vanessa Bertuzzi; Eliana Silva; Maria Carolina Neves; Célia M D Sales Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-30 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Suzanne A Eccles; Eric O Aboagye; Simak Ali; Annie S Anderson; Jo Armes; Fedor Berditchevski; Jeremy P Blaydes; Keith Brennan; Nicola J Brown; Helen E Bryant; Nigel J Bundred; Joy M Burchell; Anna M Campbell; Jason S Carroll; Robert B Clarke; Charlotte E Coles; Gary J R Cook; Angela Cox; Nicola J Curtin; Lodewijk V Dekker; Isabel dos Santos Silva; Stephen W Duffy; Douglas F Easton; Diana M Eccles; Dylan R Edwards; Joanne Edwards; D Evans; Deborah F Fenlon; James M Flanagan; Claire Foster; William M Gallagher; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Julia M W Gee; Andy J Gescher; Vicky Goh; Ashley M Groves; Amanda J Harvey; Michelle Harvie; Bryan T Hennessy; Stephen Hiscox; Ingunn Holen; Sacha J Howell; Anthony Howell; Gill Hubbard; Nick Hulbert-Williams; Myra S Hunter; Bharat Jasani; Louise J Jones; Timothy J Key; Cliona C Kirwan; Anthony Kong; Ian H Kunkler; Simon P Langdon; Martin O Leach; David J Mann; John F Marshall; Lesley Martin; Stewart G Martin; Jennifer E Macdougall; David W Miles; William R Miller; Joanna R Morris; Sue M Moss; Paul Mullan; Rachel Natrajan; James P B O'Connor; Rosemary O'Connor; Carlo Palmieri; Paul D P Pharoah; Emad A Rakha; Elizabeth Reed; Simon P Robinson; Erik Sahai; John M Saxton; Peter Schmid; Matthew J Smalley; Valerie Speirs; Robert Stein; John Stingl; Charles H Streuli; Andrew N J Tutt; Galina Velikova; Rosemary A Walker; Christine J Watson; Kaye J Williams; Leonie S Young; Alastair M Thompson Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 6.466