John M Salsman1, Kathleen J Yost, Dee W West, David Cella. 1. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, 625 North Michigan Ave., 27th Floor, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. j-salsman@northwestern.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: Individuals diagnosed and treated for cancer often report high levels of distress, continuing even after successful treatment. Spiritual well-being (SpWB) has been identified as an important factor associated with positive health outcomes. This study had two aims: (1) examine the associations between SpWB (faith and meaning/peace) and health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes and (2) examine competing hypotheses of whether the relationship among distress, SpWB, and HRQL is better explained by a stress-buffering (i.e., interaction) or a direct (main effects) model. METHODS: Study 1 consisted of 258 colorectal cancer survivors (57% men) recruited from comprehensive cancer centers in metropolitan areas (age, M=61; months post-diagnosis, M=17). Study 2 consisted of 568 colorectal cancer survivors (49% men) recruited from a regional cancer registry (age, M=67; months post-diagnosis, M=19). Participants completed measures of SpWB (functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-spiritual well-being (FACIT-Sp)) and HRQL (functional assessment of cancer therapy-colorectal) in both studies. Measures of general distress (profile of mood states-short form) and cancer-specific distress were also completed in study 1 and study 2, respectively. RESULTS: After controlling for demographic and clinical variables, faith and meaning/peace were positively associated with HRQL. However, meaning/peace emerged as a more robust predictor of HRQL outcomes than faith. Planned analyses supported a direct rather than stress-buffering effect of meaning/peace. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides further evidence of the importance of SpWB, particularly meaning/peace, to HRQL for people with colorectal cancer. Future studies of SpWB and cancer should examine domains of the FACIT-Sp separately and explore the viability of meaning-based interventions for cancer survivors.
PURPOSE: Individuals diagnosed and treated for cancer often report high levels of distress, continuing even after successful treatment. Spiritual well-being (SpWB) has been identified as an important factor associated with positive health outcomes. This study had two aims: (1) examine the associations between SpWB (faith and meaning/peace) and health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes and (2) examine competing hypotheses of whether the relationship among distress, SpWB, and HRQL is better explained by a stress-buffering (i.e., interaction) or a direct (main effects) model. METHODS: Study 1 consisted of 258 colorectal cancer survivors (57% men) recruited from comprehensive cancer centers in metropolitan areas (age, M=61; months post-diagnosis, M=17). Study 2 consisted of 568 colorectal cancer survivors (49% men) recruited from a regional cancer registry (age, M=67; months post-diagnosis, M=19). Participants completed measures of SpWB (functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-spiritual well-being (FACIT-Sp)) and HRQL (functional assessment of cancer therapy-colorectal) in both studies. Measures of general distress (profile of mood states-short form) and cancer-specific distress were also completed in study 1 and study 2, respectively. RESULTS: After controlling for demographic and clinical variables, faith and meaning/peace were positively associated with HRQL. However, meaning/peace emerged as a more robust predictor of HRQL outcomes than faith. Planned analyses supported a direct rather than stress-buffering effect of meaning/peace. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides further evidence of the importance of SpWB, particularly meaning/peace, to HRQL for people with colorectal cancer. Future studies of SpWB and cancer should examine domains of the FACIT-Sp separately and explore the viability of meaning-based interventions for cancer survivors.
Authors: John Z Ayanian; Alan M Zaslavsky; Edward Guadagnoli; Charles S Fuchs; Kathleen J Yost; Cynthia M Creech; Rosemary D Cress; Lilia C O'Connor; Dee W West; William E Wright Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-08-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Patricia A Ganz; Katherine A Desmond; Beth Leedham; Julia H Rowland; Beth E Meyerowitz; Thomas R Belin Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-01-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Patricia E Murphy; Andrea L Canada; George Fitchett; Kevin Stein; Kenneth Portier; Corinne Crammer; Amy H Peterman Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Lauren Z Davis; Michaela Cuneo; Premal H Thaker; Michael J Goodheart; David Bender; Susan K Lutgendorf Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2017-08-04 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Martijn J L Bours; Bernadette W A van der Linden; Renate M Winkels; Fränzel J van Duijnhoven; Floortje Mols; Eline H van Roekel; Ellen Kampman; Sandra Beijer; Matty P Weijenberg Journal: Oncologist Date: 2016-02-24
Authors: Mei Bai; Jane Dixon; Anna-Leila Williams; Sangchoon Jeon; Mark Lazenby; Ruth McCorkle Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2016-06-08 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Andrea Altschuler; Petra Liljestrand; Marcia Grant; Mark C Hornbrook; Robert S Krouse; Carmit K McMullen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-08-26 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: April L Buscher; Michael A Kallen; Maria E Suarez-Almazor; Thomas P Giordano Journal: J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 1.354