Literature DB >> 21882287

Psychological treatment outcomes for cancer patients: what do meta-analyses tell us about distress reduction?

Wolfgang Linden1, Afaf Girgis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The effectiveness of psychological treatment for distress reduction in cancer patients has been frequently studied and reviewed in systematic reviews but reviewer conclusions vary considerably. Clear and consistent evidence is needed to assist clinicians and administrators with their decision-making. We hypothesized that uneven handling of confounding methodological features are at least partly the reason for disagreements and reviewed the literature in this light.
METHOD: A systematic review of 14 published meta-analyses was conducted to determine whether due consideration of moderating variables in psycho-oncological treatments permits clearer recommendations. Quality of the reviews, treatment type, dosage, therapist qualities, outcomes at follow-up, and screening versus not screening for elevated distress were examined as moderator variables.
RESULTS: Treatment effects are consistently positive but also vary greatly in magnitude. There is lacking evidence for many important questions, in particular, differential treatment effects for different cancer types and stages. Regarding moderators of outcome, quality of review had no impact on results for depression but including lower quality reviews actually lead to underestimation of treatment effects for anxiety. The most potent negative moderator variable, however, is a floor effect that arises when patients are recruited for treatment studies without being selected for high levels of distress. Such indiscriminate recruitment is very frequent in psycho-oncology and leads to small reported treatment effects; when, however, patients are first screened for elevated distress, the ratio of observed treatment effects sizes is roughly three times greater.
CONCLUSION: Sweeping judgments about the effectiveness of psycho-oncological treatments for distress reduction are somewhat misleading and counter-productive. Among moderator variables, floor effects are particularly pervasive and have a large suppressor effect on observed outcomes.
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21882287     DOI: 10.1002/pon.2035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychooncology        ISSN: 1057-9249            Impact factor:   3.894


  27 in total

Review 1.  Psychosocial care in cancer.

Authors:  Samantha B Artherholt; Jesse R Fann
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 5.285

2.  Re-rethinking the article by Thombs and colleagues.

Authors:  Wolfgang Linden; Andrea Vodermaier
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Effects of web-based instruction and patient preferences on patient-reported outcomes and learning for women with advanced ovarian cancer: A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Sue V Petzel; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Julie Cragg; Molly McClellan; Daniel Chan; Julie A Jacko; François Sainfort; Melissa A Geller
Journal:  J Psychosoc Oncol       Date:  2018-05-23

4.  A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Nurse-Led Supportive Care Package (SurvivorCare) for Survivors of Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Michael Jefford; Karla Gough; Allison Drosdowsky; Lahiru Russell; Sanchia Aranda; Phyllis Butow; Jo Phipps-Nelson; Jane Young; Mei Krishnasamy; Anna Ugalde; Dorothy King; Andrew Strickland; Michael Franco; Robert Blum; Catherine Johnson; Vinod Ganju; Jeremy Shapiro; Geoffrey Chong; Julie Charlton; Andrew Haydon; Penelope Schofield
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2016-06-15

5.  Randomized psychosocial interventions for breast cancer: impact on life purpose.

Authors:  Maria G Mens; Vicki S Helgeson; Barry C Lembersky; Andrew Baum; Michael F Scheier
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2015-06-28       Impact factor: 3.894

6.  Anxiety and depression symptoms in the 2 years following diagnosis of breast or gynaecologic cancer: prevalence, course and determinants of outcome.

Authors:  Lesley Stafford; Fiona Judd; Penny Gibson; Angela Komiti; G Bruce Mann; Michael Quinn
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Online support groups for young women with breast cancer: a proof-of-concept study.

Authors:  Joanne Stephen; Adina Rojubally; Wolfgang Linden; Lihong Zhong; Gina Mackenzie; Sahar Mahmoud; Janine Giese-Davis
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Acknowledging the relevance of cognitive changes in cancer patients: perspectives of oncology practitioners in Asia.

Authors:  Yin Ting Cheung; Maung Shwe; Earl Hsien Jie Tan; Wai Keung Chui; Raymond Ng; Alexandre Chan
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 4.442

9.  Alleviation of Side Effects and Distress in Breast Cancer Patients by Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Oana Cobeanu; Daniel David
Journal:  J Clin Psychol Med Settings       Date:  2018-12

10.  Impact of a psycho-oncological rehabilitation intervention on psychological distress: the experience of CeRiOn (Oncological Rehabilitation Centre) Florence 2007-2010.

Authors:  Giovanna Franchi; Francesco Bulli; Maria Grazia Muraca; Alice Maruelli; Elisa Grechi; Guido Miccinesi
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-04-07       Impact factor: 3.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.