OBJECTIVE: The aim of this investigation was to test whether interdependence in dyads living with breast cancer could account for person-partner crossover effects in distress outcomes. METHOD: The sample consisted of 95 dyads with early-stage breast cancer. By using reciprocal dyadic data from women with breast cancer and their partners, we fit a structural equation model of the actor-partner interdependence model to examine the interaction of participants' depression and stress in predicting their partner's health outcomes. RESULTS: Results revealed a pattern of influence whereby the interaction of high levels of depression coupled with high levels of stress in women with breast cancer was associated with lowered physical health and well-being in their partners. Although depression seemed to be the key mechanism in predicting distressing outcomes, when depression was combined with any additional stress, the level of physical distress was significantly greater. Results provided preliminary empirical support for crossover effects in the physical well-being of close relational partners in a cancer-related context. Further, results showed that distressing outcomes need not be limited to emotional distress but can also include physical distress. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study illustrate why it is not sufficient to concentrate care solely on the patient with cancer. Monitoring the social well-being of patients as they go through the cancer process could be as important as assessing their psychological state or other peripheral biomarkers. This line of inquiry would be advanced by including methods other than self-report in assessments of psychological and physical health.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this investigation was to test whether interdependence in dyads living with breast cancer could account for person-partner crossover effects in distress outcomes. METHOD: The sample consisted of 95 dyads with early-stage breast cancer. By using reciprocal dyadic data from women with breast cancer and their partners, we fit a structural equation model of the actor-partner interdependence model to examine the interaction of participants' depression and stress in predicting their partner's health outcomes. RESULTS: Results revealed a pattern of influence whereby the interaction of high levels of depression coupled with high levels of stress in women with breast cancer was associated with lowered physical health and well-being in their partners. Although depression seemed to be the key mechanism in predicting distressing outcomes, when depression was combined with any additional stress, the level of physical distress was significantly greater. Results provided preliminary empirical support for crossover effects in the physical well-being of close relational partners in a cancer-related context. Further, results showed that distressing outcomes need not be limited to emotional distress but can also include physical distress. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study illustrate why it is not sufficient to concentrate care solely on the patient with cancer. Monitoring the social well-being of patients as they go through the cancer process could be as important as assessing their psychological state or other peripheral biomarkers. This line of inquiry would be advanced by including methods other than self-report in assessments of psychological and physical health.
Authors: Sharon L Manne; Jamie S Ostroff; Tina R Norton; Kevin Fox; Lori Goldstein; Generosa Grana Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Terry Badger; Chris Segrin; Paula Meek; Ana Maria Lopez; Elizabeth Bonham; Amelia Sieger Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2005-03-05 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Eva Grunfeld; Doug Coyle; Timothy Whelan; Jennifer Clinch; Leonard Reyno; Craig C Earle; Andrew Willan; Raymond Viola; Marjorie Coristine; Teresa Janz; Robert Glossop Journal: CMAJ Date: 2004-06-08 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Ulrike Boehmer; Jeffrey E Stokes; Angela R Bazzi; Michael Winter; Melissa A Clark Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2018-07-26 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Christina L Rush; Margaret Darling; Maria Gloria Elliott; Ivis Febus-Sampayo; Charlene Kuo; Juliana Muñoz; Ysabel Duron; Migdalia Torres; Claudia Campos Galván; Florencia Gonzalez; Larisa Caicedo; Anna Nápoles; Roxanne E Jensen; Emily Anderson; Kristi D Graves Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-11-08 Impact factor: 4.147
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: Christine Paul; Alix Hall; Christopher Oldmeadow; Marita Lynagh; Sharon Campbell; Ken Bradstock; Anna Williamson; Mariko Carey; Rob Sanson-Fisher Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-05-26 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Heide Götze; Michael Friedrich; Elmar Brähler; Georg Romer; Anja Mehnert; Jochen Ernst Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-09-13 Impact factor: 3.603