Dean Vuksanovic1, Heather J Green2, Murray Dyck2, Shirley A Morrissey2. 1. Menzies Health Institute Queensland and School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Southport, Queensland, Australia. Electronic address: Dean.Vuksanovic@health.qld.gov.au. 2. Menzies Health Institute Queensland and School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Dignity therapy (DT) is a psychotherapeutic intervention with increasing evidence of acceptability and utility in palliative care settings. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the legacy creation component of DT by comparing this intervention with life review (LR) and waitlist control (WC) groups. METHODS:Seventy adults with advanced terminal disease were randomly allocated to DT, LR, or WC followed by DT, of which 56 completed the study protocol. LR followed an identical protocol to DT except that no legacy document was created in LR. Primary outcome measures were the Brief Generativity and Ego-Integrity Questionnaire, Patient Dignity Inventory, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, version 4, and treatment evaluation questionnaires. RESULTS: Unlike LR and WC groups, DT recipients demonstrated significantly increased generativity and ego-integrity scores at study completion. There were no significant changes for dignity-related distress or physical, social, emotional, and functional well-being among the three groups. There were also no significant changes in primary outcomes after the provision of DT after the waiting period in the WC group. High acceptability and satisfaction with interventions were noted for recipients of both DT and LR and family/carers of DT participants. CONCLUSION: This study provides initial evidence that the specific process of legacy creation is able to positively affect sense of generativity, meaning, and acceptance near end of life. High acceptability and satisfaction rates for both DT and LR and positive impacts on families/carers of DT participants provide additional support for clinical utility of these interventions. Further evaluation of specific mechanisms of change post-intervention is required given DT's uncertain efficacy on other primary outcomes.
RCT Entities:
CONTEXT: Dignity therapy (DT) is a psychotherapeutic intervention with increasing evidence of acceptability and utility in palliative care settings. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the legacy creation component of DT by comparing this intervention with life review (LR) and waitlist control (WC) groups. METHODS: Seventy adults with advanced terminal disease were randomly allocated to DT, LR, or WC followed by DT, of which 56 completed the study protocol. LR followed an identical protocol to DT except that no legacy document was created in LR. Primary outcome measures were the Brief Generativity and Ego-Integrity Questionnaire, Patient Dignity Inventory, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, version 4, and treatment evaluation questionnaires. RESULTS: Unlike LR and WC groups, DT recipients demonstrated significantly increased generativity and ego-integrity scores at study completion. There were no significant changes for dignity-related distress or physical, social, emotional, and functional well-being among the three groups. There were also no significant changes in primary outcomes after the provision of DT after the waiting period in the WC group. High acceptability and satisfaction with interventions were noted for recipients of both DT and LR and family/carers of DTparticipants. CONCLUSION: This study provides initial evidence that the specific process of legacy creation is able to positively affect sense of generativity, meaning, and acceptance near end of life. High acceptability and satisfaction rates for both DT and LR and positive impacts on families/carers of DTparticipants provide additional support for clinical utility of these interventions. Further evaluation of specific mechanisms of change post-intervention is required given DT's uncertain efficacy on other primary outcomes.
Authors: Anna L Gravier; Omar Shamieh; Carlos Eduardo Paiva; Pedro Emilio Perez-Cruz; Mary Ann Muckaden; Minjeong Park; Eduardo Bruera; David Hui Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-12-19 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Terrah Foster Akard; Sarah Wray; Debra L Friedman; Mary S Dietrich; Verna Hendricks-Ferguson; Barbara Given; Cynthia A Gerhardt; Pamela S Hinds; Mary Jo Gilmer Journal: J Hosp Palliat Nurs Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 2.131
Authors: Lisa Scarton; Sungho Oh; Ashley Sylvera; Ralph Lamonge; Yingwei Yao; Harvey Chochinov; George Fitchett; George Handzo; Linda Emanuel; Diana Wilkie Journal: Am J Hosp Palliat Care Date: 2018-05-24 Impact factor: 2.090
Authors: Terrah Foster Akard; Mary S Dietrich; Debra L Friedman; Cynthia A Gerhardt; Barbara Given; Verna Hendricks-Ferguson; Pamela S Hinds; Sheila H Ridner; Nicole Beckmann; Mary Jo Gilmer Journal: Prog Palliat Care Date: 2020-10-20