BACKGROUND: Many women with breast cancer need psychological help to cope more effectively after treatment. Cognitive and behavioural techniques are not yet well established in France. A multi-site randomized study was conducted to evaluate the effects of a psycho-educational group intervention in this population. METHODS:Two hundred and three patients, recruited after primary treatment, were randomly assigned either to a treatment group (psycho-educational intervention) or to a waiting-list control group. The 8-week programme of 2 h sessions comprised of thematic discussions, information and training in stress management techniques. Evaluation at baseline, after 8 sessions, and 1 month after programme completion, included evaluations using the STAI, POMS, MAC, EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 breast module scales. RESULTS: We observed a significant reduction in anxiety (STAI, POMS) among group participants, a reduction in anger, depression and fatigue (POMS), a significant improvement in vigor and interpersonal relationships (POMS), in emotional and role functioning, in health status and fatigue level (EORTC QLQ-C30). In contrast, coping strategies (MAC) were not significantly different between groups. No group-related negative effects were observed and the global satisfaction levels were very high. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of a psycho-educational intervention, which can accelerate the reduction of those negative affects which are present at the end of treatment. It represents an excellent complement or an alternative to individual psycho-oncologic therapeutic support, widely proposed in France, and should now be tested in groups with other types of cancer and at other disease phases.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Many women with breast cancer need psychological help to cope more effectively after treatment. Cognitive and behavioural techniques are not yet well established in France. A multi-site randomized study was conducted to evaluate the effects of a psycho-educational group intervention in this population. METHODS: Two hundred and three patients, recruited after primary treatment, were randomly assigned either to a treatment group (psycho-educational intervention) or to a waiting-list control group. The 8-week programme of 2 h sessions comprised of thematic discussions, information and training in stress management techniques. Evaluation at baseline, after 8 sessions, and 1 month after programme completion, included evaluations using the STAI, POMS, MAC, EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 breast module scales. RESULTS: We observed a significant reduction in anxiety (STAI, POMS) among group participants, a reduction in anger, depression and fatigue (POMS), a significant improvement in vigor and interpersonal relationships (POMS), in emotional and role functioning, in health status and fatigue level (EORTC QLQ-C30). In contrast, coping strategies (MAC) were not significantly different between groups. No group-related negative effects were observed and the global satisfaction levels were very high. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of a psycho-educational intervention, which can accelerate the reduction of those negative affects which are present at the end of treatment. It represents an excellent complement or an alternative to individual psycho-oncologic therapeutic support, widely proposed in France, and should now be tested in groups with other types of cancer and at other disease phases.
Authors: Ardith Z Doorenbos; Linda H Eaton; Emily Haozous; Cara Towle; Laura Revels; Dedra Buchwald Journal: Clin J Oncol Nurs Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 1.027
Authors: Ann M Berger; Kathi Mooney; Amy Alvarez-Perez; William S Breitbart; Kristen M Carpenter; David Cella; Charles Cleeland; Efrat Dotan; Mario A Eisenberger; Carmen P Escalante; Paul B Jacobsen; Catherine Jankowski; Thomas LeBlanc; Jennifer A Ligibel; Elizabeth Trice Loggers; Belinda Mandrell; Barbara A Murphy; Oxana Palesh; William F Pirl; Steven C Plaxe; Michelle B Riba; Hope S Rugo; Carolina Salvador; Lynne I Wagner; Nina D Wagner-Johnston; Finly J Zachariah; Mary Anne Bergman; Courtney Smith Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Shelley A Johns; Linda F Brown; Kathleen Beck-Coon; Tasneem L Talib; Patrick O Monahan; R Brian Giesler; Yan Tong; Laura Wilhelm; Janet S Carpenter; Diane Von Ah; Christina D Wagner; Mary de Groot; Karen Schmidt; Diane Monceski; Marie Danh; Jennifer M Alyea; Kathy D Miller; Kurt Kroenke Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Helena Granstam Björneklett; Christina Lindemalm; Marja-Leena Ojutkangas; Anders Berglund; Henry Letocha; Peter Strang; Leif Bergkvist Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-05-11 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Charlene J Treanor; Una C McMenamin; Roisin F O'Neill; Chris R Cardwell; Mike J Clarke; Marie Cantwell; Michael Donnelly Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-08-16