| Literature DB >> 29849515 |
Daiva Petruseviciene1, Deive Surmaitiene2, Daiva Baltaduoniene1, Egle Lendraitiene1.
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate the short-term effects of community-based occupational therapy on health-related quality of life and engagement in meaningful activities among women with breast cancer. An open label randomized controlled trial study design was applied. The participants were members of various societies of women with cancer. In total, 22 women have participated in the study. Participants of the experimental group (n = 11) participated in a 6-week community-based occupational therapy program and the usual activities of various societies, whereas the control group (n = 11) women participated in the usual activities of the societies only. 1 of the participants withdrew during the course; therefore 21 completed the study successfully. Participants of both groups were assessed for health-related quality of life and the participants of the experimental group were assessed for engagement in meaningful activities. The evaluation was carried out during the nonacute period of the disease-at the beginning of the study and after 6 weeks. Women of the experimental group demonstrated statistically significantly better scores in the global quality of life, role functions, physical, emotional, cognitive, and social functions, fatigue, insomnia, financial impact, systemic therapy side effects, and breast symptoms scales compared to the control group participants (p < 0.05) after the 6 weeks, as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire and its breast cancer module QLQ-BR23. Furthermore, women of the experimental group demonstrated significant greater engagement in meaningful activities when applying community-based occupational therapy (p < 0.05), as measured by using the Engagement in Meaningful Activities Survey (EMAS). The evaluation of the associations between the women's engagement in meaningful activities and changes in health-related quality of life showed that greater engagement in meaningful activities was associated with better emotional functions and a lower level of insomnia (p < 0.05). Based on the results of our study, we recommend applying occupational therapy in the field of community healthcare in order to maintain or improve breast cancer patients' health-related quality of life and suggest involving women into meaningful activities during community-based occupational therapy after clarifying which activities are important to them.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29849515 PMCID: PMC5932445 DOI: 10.1155/2018/6798697
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Occup Ther Int ISSN: 0966-7903 Impact factor: 1.448
Participants' characteristics.
| Characteristic | Total | Experimental group |
| Control group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Young or middle-aged (18–59 years) | 11 (50) | 6 (54.5) | 1 | 5 (45.5) |
| Elderly or old (60–80 years) | 11 (50) | 5 (45.5) | 6 (54.5) | |
|
| ||||
| Employed or a student | 9 (40.9) | 4 (36.4) | 1 | 5 (45.5) |
| Unemployed, housewife, retired, or not working because of disability | 13 (59.1) | 7 (63.6) | 6 (54.5) | |
|
| ||||
| <5 years | 11 (50) | 5 (45.5) | 1 | 6 (54.5) |
| ≥5 years | 11 (50) | 6 (54.5) | 5 (45.5) | |
|
| ||||
| 0, I, or II | 17 (77.3) | 10 (90.9) | 0.311 | 7 (63.6) |
| III or IV | 5 (22.7) | 1 (9.1) | 4 (36.4) | |
|
| ||||
| Left | 12 (54.5) | 6 (54.5) | 1 | 6 (54.5) |
| Right | 10 (45.5) | 5 (45.5) | 5 (45.5) | |
|
| ||||
| Present | 3 (13.6) | 1 (9.1) | 1 | 2 (18.2) |
| Absent | 19 (86.4) | 10 (90.9) | 9 (81.8) | |
|
| ||||
| 0 or 1 b. | 17 (77.3) | 8 (72.7) | 1 | 9 (81.8) |
| 2 b. | 5 (22.7) | (27.3) | 2 (18.2) |
Statistical significance was determined according to the χ2 criterion with Yates correction, no significant differences between the groups, p ≥ 0.05. Statistical significance was determined according to Fisher's exact criterion, no significant differences between the groups, p >0.05.
Description of the application of the occupational therapy program in the community of women with breast cancer.
| Topic | Aims | Activities | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Session I | The beginning of the study | Familiarization, presentation of the study and the planned program, and initiation of the study. | Self-introduction and presentation of the study, a report on the topic of the study, initial filing out of the questionnaires, questions, and answers. |
|
| |||
| Session |
| Socializing, cooperation, increasing the hand movement amplitude or prevention, development of positive emotions, and sharing positive experience and emotions with those facing the same or similar problems. | Sapling replanting (gardening therapy), advice and discussions about the hand movement amplitude, and donation of saplings to hospitalized women with breast cancer. |
|
| |||
| Session |
| Experiencing relaxation and calmness, expression of emotions, socialization, prevention or reduction of lymphedema, and sharing positive experience and emotions with those facing the same or similar problems. | Folding paper cranes (art therapy) + a lecture, exercises, and discussions on lymphedema treatment and prevention, as well as on an occupational therapist's assistance. |
|
| |||
| Session |
| Experiencing relaxation and calmness, expression of emotions, socialization, presentation of the energy conservation principles and their practical application, and sharing positive experience and emotions with those facing the same or similar problems. | Making an original picture postcard (art therapy) while listening to specially selected calm music (music therapy) + a lecture and discussions on fatigue and energy conservation techniques (planning, adjustment of the environment, biomechanics of the body, etc.). |
|
| |||
| Session |
| Gratuitous assistance. | Knitting socks + a lecture on the need for socks and donation of socks to preterm newborns. |
|
| |||
| Session VI | The end of the study | Discussion on the work done, sharing impressions and results, and conclusion of the study. | Summing-up of the program, repeated filling out of the questionnaires, feedback, discussions, questions/answers, etc. |
Distribution of evaluation scores in health-related quality of life questionnaire scales in the groups at baseline.
| Scales of the quality of life questionnaires | Experimental group |
| Control group | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| EORTC QLQ C-30 | |||||
| Global health status/QoL | 11 | 50 (33.33–83.33; 50.75) | 41.5; 0.217 | 11 | 58.33 (33.33–91.67; 59.85) |
|
| |||||
| Physical functioning | 11 | 60 (40–86.67; 63.64) | 50; 0.519 | 11 | 73.33 (46.67–86.67; 67.88) |
| Role functioning | 11 | 66.67 (16.67–100; 68.18) | 60; 1 | 11 | 66.67 (33.33–100; 69.7) |
| Emotional functioning | 11 | 50 (8.33–100; 52.27) | 36.5; 0.116 | 11 | 66.67 (8.33–100; 65.91) |
| Cognitive functioning | 11 | 50 (0–83.33; 54.55) | 35.5; 0.101 | 11 | 83.33 (50–100; 72.73) |
| Social functioning | 11 | 50 (16.67–83.33; 48.49) | 32; 0.065 | 11 | 66.67 (50–100; 69.7) |
|
| |||||
| Fatigue | 11 | 55.56 (33.33–77.78; 54.55) | 54.5; 0.699 | 11 | 44.44 (11.11–88.89; 50.5) |
| Nausea and vomiting | 11 | 0 (0–50; 7.58) | 54.5; 0.699 | 11 | 0 (0–66.67; 12.12) |
| Pain | 11 | 33.33 (0–83.33; 34.85) | 56; 0.797 | 11 | 33.33 (0–83.33; 28.79) |
| Dyspnoea | 11 | 0 (0–33.33; 15.15) | 50; 0.519 | 11 | 33.33 (0–66.67; 24.24) |
| Insomnia | 11 | 66.67 (0–100; 66.67) | 39; 0.171 | 11 | 66.67 (0–66.67; 48.49) |
| Appetite loss | 11 | 0 (0–33.33; 9.09) | 44; 0.3 | 11 | 33.33 (0–33.33; 18.18) |
| Constipation | 11 | 33.33 (0–100; 42.42) | 48; 0.438 | 11 | 0 (0–100; 24.24) |
| Diarrhoea | 11 | 0 (0–66.67; 9.09) | 60; 1 | 11 | 0 (0–100; 12.12) |
| Financial difficulties | 11 | 66.67 (33.33–100; 69.7) | 42; 0.243 | 11 | 66.67 (0–100; 51.52) |
|
| |||||
| EORTC QLQ BR-23 | |||||
|
| |||||
| Body image | 11 | 58.33 (0–83.33; 51.51) | 28.5; 0.562 | 11 | 41.57 (25–91.67; 48.48) |
| Sexual functioning | 11 | 100 (0–100; 81.82) | 60; 1 | 11 | 100 (33.33–100; 81.82) |
| Sexual enjoyment | 5 | 66.67 (33.33–100; 73.33) | 9; 0.548 | 5 | 66.67 (33.33–100; 60) |
| Future perspective | 11 | 33.33 (0–66.67; 33.33) | 51.5; 0.562 | 11 | 33.33 (0–66.67; 27.27) |
|
| |||||
| Systemic therapy side effects | 11 | 23.81 (4.76–61.90; 31.6) | 58; 0.898 | 11 | 28.57 (4.76–57.14; 29) |
| Breast symptoms | 11 | 41.67 (8.33–75; 38.64) | 41; 0.217 | 11 | 25 (0–66.67; 28.79) |
| Arm symptoms | 11 | 33.33 (0–77.78; 37.37) | 63; 0.898 | 11 | 44.44 (0–88.89; 38.38) |
| Upset by hair loss | 6 | 16.67 (0–33.33; 16.67) | 28.5; 0.573 | 8 | 33.33 (0–100; 29.17) |
Statistical significance was determined according to the nonparametric Mann–Whitney-Wilcoxon criterion, no significant differences between the groups, p ≥ 0.05.
Characteristics of changes in the evaluation scores of the scales of the global quality of life questionnaire EORTC QLQ-C30 in the experimental and the control group women.
| Scales of the quality of life questionnaire | EGr | EGr change | CGr | CGr change | Difference between the groups at the end | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | After | Before | After | ||||
| EORTC QLQ C-30 | |||||||
| Global health status/QoL | 50 | 66.67 | −2.829; 0.005 | 58.33 | 50 | −1.956; 0.05 | 0; 0.001 |
|
| |||||||
| Physical functioning | 60 | 70 | −2.384; 0.017 | 73.33 | 60 | −1.012; 0.311 | 20; 0.013 |
| Role functioning | 66.67 | 75 | −1.023; 0.306 | 66.67 | 66.67 | −1.409; 0.159 | 25.5; 0.036 |
| Emotional functioning | 50 | 62.5 | −2.670; 0.008 | 66.67 | 58.33 | −1.480; 0.139 | 8.5; 0.001 |
| Cognitive functioning | 50 | 66.67 | −2.060; 0.039 | 83.33 | 50 | −2.388; 0.017 | 10; 0.001 |
| Social functioning | 50 | 66.67 | −1.951; 0.051 | 66.67 | 50 | −2.410; 0.016 | 13; 0.002 |
|
| |||||||
| Fatigue | 55.56 | 44.44 | −2.555; 0.011 | 44.44 | 66.67 | −2.568; 0.010 | 5; 0.001 |
| Nausea and vomiting | 0 | 0 | −1.089; 0.276 | 0 | 0 | −1.289; 0.197 | 51; 0.809 |
| Pain | 33.33 | 16.67 | −0.933; 0.351 | 33.33 | 33.33 | −0.213; 0.832 | 41.5; 0.349 |
| Dyspnoea | 0 | 0 | −1; 0.317 | 33.33 | 33.33 | −1.382; 0.167 | 32.5; 0.114 |
| Insomnia | 66.67 | 33.33 | −2.280; 0.023 | 66.67 | 66.67 | −1.890; 0.059 | 19; 0.01 |
| Appetite loss | 0 | 0 | −0.707; 0.480 | 33.33 | 33.33 | −1.633; 0.102 | 48; 0.654; |
| Constipation | 33.33 | 16.67 | −1.890; 0.059 | 0 | 0 | −0.730; 0.465 | 48; 0.654; |
| Diarrhoea | 0 | 0 | −1; 0.317 | 0 | 0 | −0.816; 0.414 | 40.5; 0.314; |
| Financial difficulties | 66.67 | 66.67 | −1.236; 0.216 | 66.67 | 66.67 | −2.041; 0.041 | 23.5; 0.024 |
Statistical significance was determined according to the nonparametric Wilcoxon criterion; the differences between the groups were significant when p < 0.05. Statistical significance was determined according to the nonparametric Mann–Whitney-Wilcoxon criterion; the differences between the groups were significant when p < 0.05. Note. EGr: experimental group; CGr: control group.
Characteristics of changes in the evaluation scores of the scales of the global quality of life questionnaire module EORTC QLQ-BR23 in the experimental and the control group women.
| Scales of the quality of life questionnaire | EGr | EGr change | CGr | CGr change | Difference between the groups at the end | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | After | Before | After | ||||
| EORTC QLQ BR-23 | |||||||
|
| |||||||
| Body image | 58.33 | 58.33 | −0.512; 0.609 | 41.67 | 41.67 | −1.2; 0.23 | 53; 0.918 |
| Sexual functioning | 100 | 66.67 | −2.041; 0.041 | 100 | 83.33 | 0; 1 | 32.5; 0.114 |
| Sexual enjoyment | 66.67 | 50 | −1.604; 0.109 | 66.67 | 66.67 | −0.816; 0.414 | 4.5; 0.095 |
| Future perspective | 33.33 | 33.33 | −0.184; 0.854 | 33.33 | 33.33 | −0.184; 0.854 | 55; 1 |
|
| |||||||
| Systemic therapy side effects | 23.81 | 23.81 | −2.092; 0.036 | 28.57 | 38.1 | −2.371; 0.018 | 11; 0.001 |
| Breast symptoms | 41.67 | 25 | −2.352; 0.019 | 25 | 33.33 | −0.511; 0.61 | 24.5; 0.029 |
| Arm symptoms | 33.33 | 23.61 | −0.986; 0.324 | 44.44 | 44.44 | −0.106; 0.915 | 48; 0.654 |
| Upset by hair loss | 16.67 | 33.33 | −1.633; 0.102 | 33.33 | 33.33 | −1.841; 0.066 | 22.5; 0.852 |
Statistical significance was determined according to the nonparametric Wilcoxon criterion; the differences between the groups were significant when p < 0.05. Statistical significance was determined according to the nonparametric Mann–Whitney-Wilcoxon criterion; the differences between the groups were significant when p < 0.05.
Figure 1Changes in the engagement in meaningful activities in the experimental group participants, p = 0.005.
Relationship between engagement in meaningful activities and evaluations scores of health-related quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) in women with breast cancer.
| Scales of the quality of life questionnaire | Relationship with changes in the engagement in meaningful activities |
|---|---|
| EORTC QLQ-C30 | |
| Global health status/QoL |
|
|
| |
| Physical functioning |
|
| Role functioning |
|
| Emotional functioning |
|
| Cognitive functioning |
|
| Social functioning |
|
|
| |
| Fatigue |
|
| Nausea and vomiting |
|
| Pain |
|
| Dyspnoea |
|
| Insomnia |
|
| Appetite loss |
|
| Constipation |
|
| Diarrhoea |
|
| Financial difficulties |
|
Statistical significance was determined according to Spearman's correlation coefficient; the association was statistically significant when p < 0.05.
Relationship between engagement in meaningful activities and evaluations scores of health-related quality of life (EORTC QLQ- BR23) in women with breast cancer.
| Scales of the quality of life questionnaire | Relationship with changes in the engagement in meaningful activities |
|---|---|
| EORTC QLQ-BR23 | |
|
| |
| Body image |
|
| Sexual functioning |
|
| Sexual enjoyment |
|
| Future perspective |
|
|
| |
| Systemic therapy side effects |
|
| Breast symptoms |
|
| Arm symptoms |
|
| Upset by hair loss |
|
Statistical significance was determined according to Spearman's correlation coefficient; the association was statistically significant when p < 0.05.