OBJECTIVE: To describe the methodology of evaluating the response of cancer patients to interventions directed at lowering severity of multiple symptoms, and to compare two arms of a symptom management trial to determine factors associated with response and time to response. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized trial comparing a nurse-assisted symptom management (NASM) cognitive-behavioral intervention with an automated telephone symptom management (ATSM). Patients in both arms received six intervention contacts over 8 weeks. Analyses of the intervention contact data for 190 patients in NASM arm and 164 patients in the ATSM arm were conducted. Severities of 15 cancer-related symptoms were assessed at each intervention contact, and an anchor-based definition of response was adopted. Analyses were carried out using generalized estimating equations and Cox marginal proportional hazard models. RESULTS: When compared with patients in the NASM, patients in the ATSM had better response to manage anxiety, depression, poor appetite, cough, and fatigue. NASM was more successful in managing cancer pain. Response and time to response were associated with several patient and disease characteristics. CONCLUSION: The approach described here presents an analytic and clinical improvement over methods that examine each symptom separately or use summed scores of severity.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To describe the methodology of evaluating the response of cancerpatients to interventions directed at lowering severity of multiple symptoms, and to compare two arms of a symptom management trial to determine factors associated with response and time to response. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized trial comparing a nurse-assisted symptom management (NASM) cognitive-behavioral intervention with an automated telephone symptom management (ATSM). Patients in both arms received six intervention contacts over 8 weeks. Analyses of the intervention contact data for 190 patients in NASM arm and 164 patients in the ATSM arm were conducted. Severities of 15 cancer-related symptoms were assessed at each intervention contact, and an anchor-based definition of response was adopted. Analyses were carried out using generalized estimating equations and Cox marginal proportional hazard models. RESULTS: When compared with patients in the NASM, patients in the ATSM had better response to manage anxiety, depression, poor appetite, cough, and fatigue. NASM was more successful in managing cancer pain. Response and time to response were associated with several patient and disease characteristics. CONCLUSION: The approach described here presents an analytic and clinical improvement over methods that examine each symptom separately or use summed scores of severity.
Authors: R K Portenoy; H T Thaler; A B Kornblith; J M Lepore; H Friedlander-Klar; N Coyle; T Smart-Curley; N Kemeny; L Norton; W Hoskins Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 1994-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Charles Given; Barbara Given; Mohammad Rahbar; Sangchoon Jeon; Ruth McCorkle; Bernadine Cimprich; Andrzej Galecki; Sharon Kozachik; Albert Brady; Mary Jo Fisher-Malloy; Kathy Courtney; Elizabeth Bowie Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Carolyn Miller Reilly; Deborah Watkins Bruner; Sandra A Mitchell; Lori M Minasian; Ethan Basch; Amylou C Dueck; David Cella; Bryce B Reeve Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-01-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Charles W Given; Barbara A Given; Alla Sikorskii; Mei You; Sangchoon Jeon; Victoria Champion; Ruth McCorkle Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2010-08
Authors: Alla Sikorskii; Gwen Wyatt; Rebecca Lehto; David Victorson; Terry Badger; Thaddeus Pace Journal: Res Nurs Health Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: JiYeon Choi; Leslie A Hoffman; Richard Schulz; Judith A Tate; Michael P Donahoe; Dianxu Ren; Barbara A Given; Paula R Sherwood Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2013-07-12 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: JiYeon Choi; Judith A Tate; Leslie A Hoffman; Richard Schulz; Dianxu Ren; Michael P Donahoe; Barbara A Given; Paula R Sherwood Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2014-01-16 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Toni Tripp-Reimer; Janet K Williams; Sue E Gardner; Barbara Rakel; Keela Herr; Ann Marie McCarthy; Linda Liu Hand; Stephanie Gilbertson-White; Catherine Cherwin Journal: Nurs Outlook Date: 2020-05-29 Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: Alla Sikorskii; Charles W Given; Azfar-E-Alam Siddiqi; Victoria Champion; Ruth McCorkle; Sandra L Spoelstra; Barbara A Given Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 3.894