BACKGROUND: Critical gaps exist in the understanding of cancer symptoms, particularly for cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Existing theories and models do not examine the key role perceived self-efficacy (PSE) plays in a person's ability to manage symptoms. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that physical functional status (PFS) is predicted through patient characteristics, CRF, other symptoms, and PSE for fatigue self-management in persons with cancer. METHODS: This study is a secondary data analysis from the baseline observation of two randomized control trials. The combined data set includes 298 participants who were undergoing a course of chemotherapy. Key variables included physiological and contextual patient characteristics, the severity from CRF and other symptoms, PSE, and PFS. Path analysis examined the relationships among the variables in the proposed theoretical model. RESULTS: Persons with cancer reported CRF as the most prevalent symptom among a mean of 7.4 other concurrent symptoms. The severity from CRF had a direct and indirect effect on PFS, with CRF having a direct adverse impact on PFS (t = -7.02) and an indirect adverse effect as part of the severity from the other symptoms (t = 9.69), which also adversely impacted PFS (t = -2.71). Consistent with the proposed theoretical model, PSE had a positive effect on the PFS (t = 2.87) of persons with cancer while serving as a mediator between CRF severity and PFS. DISCUSSION: Cancer-related fatigue is prevalent and related to the presence of other symptoms, and PSE for fatigue self-management is an important factor influencing CRF and PFS. A foundation is provided for future intervention studies to increase PSE to achieve optimal PFS in persons with cancer.
BACKGROUND: Critical gaps exist in the understanding of cancer symptoms, particularly for cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Existing theories and models do not examine the key role perceived self-efficacy (PSE) plays in a person's ability to manage symptoms. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that physical functional status (PFS) is predicted through patient characteristics, CRF, other symptoms, and PSE for fatigue self-management in persons with cancer. METHODS: This study is a secondary data analysis from the baseline observation of two randomized control trials. The combined data set includes 298 participants who were undergoing a course of chemotherapy. Key variables included physiological and contextual patient characteristics, the severity from CRF and other symptoms, PSE, and PFS. Path analysis examined the relationships among the variables in the proposed theoretical model. RESULTS:Persons with cancer reported CRF as the most prevalent symptom among a mean of 7.4 other concurrent symptoms. The severity from CRF had a direct and indirect effect on PFS, with CRF having a direct adverse impact on PFS (t = -7.02) and an indirect adverse effect as part of the severity from the other symptoms (t = 9.69), which also adversely impacted PFS (t = -2.71). Consistent with the proposed theoretical model, PSE had a positive effect on the PFS (t = 2.87) of persons with cancer while serving as a mediator between CRF severity and PFS. DISCUSSION: Cancer-related fatigue is prevalent and related to the presence of other symptoms, and PSE for fatigue self-management is an important factor influencing CRF and PFS. A foundation is provided for future intervention studies to increase PSE to achieve optimal PFS in persons with cancer.
Authors: P Stone; E Ream; A Richardson; H Thomas; P Andrews; P Campbell; T Dawson; J Edwards; T Goldie; M Hammick; N Kearney; M Lean; D Rapley; A G Smith; C Teague; A Young Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 2.520
Authors: M Dodd; S Janson; N Facione; J Faucett; E S Froelicher; J Humphreys; K Lee; C Miaskowski; K Puntillo; S Rankin; D Taylor Journal: J Adv Nurs Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 3.187
Authors: Barbara Given; Charles W Given; Ruth McCorkle; Sharon Kozachik; Bernadine Cimprich; Mohammad Hossein Rahbar; Chris Wojcik Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Francis J Keefe; Tim A Ahles; Laura S Porter; Linda M Sutton; Colleen M McBride; Mary Susan Pope; Elizabeth T McKinstry; Charlotte P Furstenberg; JoAnn Dalton; Donald H Baucom Journal: Pain Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Amy J Hoffman; Alexander von Eye; Audrey G Gift; Barbara A Given; Charles W Given; Marilyn Rothert Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2011 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Adrian N S Badana; Victoria R Marino; Maureen E Templeman; Susan C McMillan; Cindy S Tofthagen; Brent J Small; William E Haley Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-03-08 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Charlène Villaron; François Cury; François Eisinger; Maria-A Cappiello; Tanguy Marqueste Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-04-19 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Nina Rottmann; Susanne O Dalton; Jane Christensen; Kirsten Frederiksen; Christoffer Johansen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-04-17 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Amy J Hoffman; Ruth Ann Brintnall; Barbara A Given; Alexander von Eye; Lee W Jones; Jean K Brown Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2017 Jan/Feb Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Victoria L Champion; Kim W Ziner; Patrick O Monahan; Timothy E Stump; David Cella; Lisa G Smith; Cynthia J Bell; Diane Von Ah; George W Sledge Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Amy J Hoffman; Ruth Ann Brintnall; Alexander von Eye; Lee W Jones; Gordon Alderink; Lawrence H Patzelt; Jean K Brown Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 2.895