BACKGROUND: Professional-led cancer support groups can improve quality of life and address unmet needs, but most Canadians affected by cancer do not have access to or do not make use of cancer support groups. A collaborative interdisciplinary team developed, operated, and evaluated Internet-based, professional-led, live-chat support groups (osgs) for cancer patients, caregivers, and survivors across Canada. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to report participant and participation characteristics in the pan-Canadian initiative known as CancerChatCanada, and to understand participant perspectives about the quality of communication and professional facilitation, overall satisfaction, and psychosocial benefits and outcomes. METHODS: Participants in osgs provided informed consent. Participant and participation characteristics were gathered from program data collection tools and are described using frequencies, means, and chi-squares. Patient, survivor, and caregiver perspectives were derived from 102 telephone interviews conducted after osg completion and subjected to a directed qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The 55 professional-led osgs enrolled 351 participants from 9 provinces. More than half the participants came from rural or semirural areas, and more than 84% had no received previous cancer support. The attendance rate was 75%, the dropout rate was 26%, and 80% of participants were satisfied or very satisfied. The convenience and privacy of osgs were benefits. Meaningful communication about important and difficult topics, kinship and bonding with others, and improved mood and self-care were perceived outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that this collaborative initiative was successful in increasing reach and access, and that pan-Canadian, professional-led osgs provide psychosocial benefit to underserved and burdened cancer patients, survivors, and family caregivers.
BACKGROUND: Professional-led cancer support groups can improve quality of life and address unmet needs, but most Canadians affected by cancer do not have access to or do not make use of cancer support groups. A collaborative interdisciplinary team developed, operated, and evaluated Internet-based, professional-led, live-chat support groups (osgs) for cancerpatients, caregivers, and survivors across Canada. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to report participant and participation characteristics in the pan-Canadian initiative known as CancerChatCanada, and to understand participant perspectives about the quality of communication and professional facilitation, overall satisfaction, and psychosocial benefits and outcomes. METHODS:Participants in osgs provided informed consent. Participant and participation characteristics were gathered from program data collection tools and are described using frequencies, means, and chi-squares. Patient, survivor, and caregiver perspectives were derived from 102 telephone interviews conducted after osg completion and subjected to a directed qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The 55 professional-led osgs enrolled 351 participants from 9 provinces. More than half the participants came from rural or semirural areas, and more than 84% had no received previous cancer support. The attendance rate was 75%, the dropout rate was 26%, and 80% of participants were satisfied or very satisfied. The convenience and privacy of osgs were benefits. Meaningful communication about important and difficult topics, kinship and bonding with others, and improved mood and self-care were perceived outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that this collaborative initiative was successful in increasing reach and access, and that pan-Canadian, professional-led osgs provide psychosocial benefit to underserved and burdened cancerpatients, survivors, and family caregivers.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer; Internet; confidentiality; online support; professional-led; program evaluation; psychosocial
Authors: P J Goodwin; M Leszcz; M Ennis; J Koopmans; L Vincent; H Guther; E Drysdale; M Hundleby; H M Chochinov; M Navarro; M Speca; J Hunter Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-12-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew J Winzelberg; Catherine Classen; Georg W Alpers; Heidi Roberts; Cheryl Koopman; Robert E Adams; Heidemarie Ernst; Parvati Dev; C Barr Taylor Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-03-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: James D Harrison; Jane M Young; Melanie A Price; Phyllis N Butow; Michael J Solomon Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 3.603
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: Morton A Lieberman; Mitch Golant; Janine Giese-Davis; Andy Winzlenberg; Harold Benjamin; Keith Humphreys; Carol Kronenwetter; Stefani Russo; David Spiegel Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: L E Carlson; M Angen; J Cullum; E Goodey; J Koopmans; L Lamont; J H MacRae; M Martin; G Pelletier; J Robinson; J S A Simpson; M Speca; L Tillotson; B D Bultz Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2004-06-14 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Angela L Falisi; Kara P Wiseman; Anna Gaysynsky; Jennifer K Scheideler; Daniel A Ramin; Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2017-06-10 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: J Stephen; K Fergus; S Sellick; M Speca; J Taylor-Brown; J Turner; K Collie; D McLeod; A Rojubally Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Deanna J Attai; Michael S Cowher; Mohammed Al-Hamadani; Jody M Schoger; Alicia C Staley; Jeffrey Landercasper Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 5.428