PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to explore the perceived need for supportive care including healthy lifestyle programs among cancer survivors, their attitude towards self-management and eHealth, and its association with several sociodemographic and clinical variables and quality of life. METHODS: A questionnaire on the perceived need for supportive care and attitude towards self-management and eHealth was completed by 212 cancer survivors from an online panel. RESULTS: Highest needs were reported regarding physical care (66 %), followed by healthy lifestyle programs (54 %), social care (43 %), psychological care (38 %), and life question-related programs (24 %). In general, cancer survivors had a positive attitude towards self-management and eHealth. Supportive care needs were associated with male gender, lower age, treatment with chemotherapy or (chemo)radiation (versus surgery alone), hematological cancer (versus skin cancer, breast cancer, and other types of cancer), and lower quality of life. A positive attitude towards self-management was associated with lower age. A more positive attitude towards eHealth was associated with lower age, higher education, higher income, currently being under treatment (versus treatment in the last year), treatment with chemotherapy or (chemo)radiation (versus surgery alone), prostate and testicular cancer (versus hematological, skin, gynecological, and breast cancer and other types of cancer), and lower quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The perceived need for supportive care including healthy lifestyle programs was high, and in general, cancer survivors had a positive attitude towards self-management and eHealth. Need and attitude were associated with sociodemographic and clinical variables and quality of life. Therefore, a tailored approach seems to be warranted to improve and innovate supportive care targeting cancer survivors.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to explore the perceived need for supportive care including healthy lifestyle programs among cancer survivors, their attitude towards self-management and eHealth, and its association with several sociodemographic and clinical variables and quality of life. METHODS: A questionnaire on the perceived need for supportive care and attitude towards self-management and eHealth was completed by 212 cancer survivors from an online panel. RESULTS: Highest needs were reported regarding physical care (66 %), followed by healthy lifestyle programs (54 %), social care (43 %), psychological care (38 %), and life question-related programs (24 %). In general, cancer survivors had a positive attitude towards self-management and eHealth. Supportive care needs were associated with male gender, lower age, treatment with chemotherapy or (chemo)radiation (versus surgery alone), hematological cancer (versus skin cancer, breast cancer, and other types of cancer), and lower quality of life. A positive attitude towards self-management was associated with lower age. A more positive attitude towards eHealth was associated with lower age, higher education, higher income, currently being under treatment (versus treatment in the last year), treatment with chemotherapy or (chemo)radiation (versus surgery alone), prostate and testicular cancer (versus hematological, skin, gynecological, and breast cancer and other types of cancer), and lower quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The perceived need for supportive care including healthy lifestyle programs was high, and in general, cancer survivors had a positive attitude towards self-management and eHealth. Need and attitude were associated with sociodemographic and clinical variables and quality of life. Therefore, a tailored approach seems to be warranted to improve and innovate supportive care targeting cancer survivors.
Authors: Dena Schulman-Green; Elizabeth H Bradley; M Tish Knobf; Holly Prigerson; Michael P DiGiovanna; Ruth McCorkle Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2011-03-27 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Yan Leykin; Seema M Thekdi; Dianne M Shumay; Ricardo F Muñoz; Michelle Riba; Laura B Dunn Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: David P Smith; Rajah Supramaniam; Madeleine T King; Jeanette Ward; Martin Berry; Bruce K Armstrong Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw; Remco de Bree; Alieke L Keizer; Ton Houffelaar; Pim Cuijpers; Mecheline H van der Linden; C René Leemans Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2009-04-09 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: A Brédart; J-L Kop; A-C Griesser; C Fiszer; K Zaman; B Panes-Ruedin; W Jeanneret; J-F Delaloye; S Zimmers; V Berthet; S Dolbeault Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2013-04-07 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Rosalie van der Vaart; Alexander Jam van Deursen; Constance Hc Drossaert; Erik Taal; Jan Amg van Dijk; Mart Afj van de Laar Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Jean C Yi; Brie Sullivan; Wendy M Leisenring; Navneet S Majhail; Heather Jim; Alison Loren; Joseph Uberti; Victoria Whalen; Mary E D Flowers; Stephanie J Lee; Katie Maynard; Karen L Syrjala Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2020-06-26 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Karen L Syrjala; Jean C Yi; Samantha B Artherholt; Joan M Romano; Marie-Laure Crouch; Allison S Fiscalini; Mark T Hegel; Mary E D Flowers; Paul J Martin; Wendy M Leisenring Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2018-05-05 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Stephen J Lepore; Maria A Rincon; Joanne S Buzaglo; Mitch Golant; Morton A Lieberman; Sarah Bauerle Bass; Suzanne Chambers Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 2.520
Authors: Martin Holderried; C Ernst; F Holderried; M Rieger; G Blumenstock; A Tropitzsch Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-04-25 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: N Fridriksdottir; S Gunnarsdottir; S Zoëga; B Ingadottir; E J G Hafsteinsdottir Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-09-18 Impact factor: 3.603