| Literature DB >> 34769643 |
Rebecca H Lehto1, Gwen Wyatt1, Jessica Sender1, Sara E Miller2.
Abstract
Home-based informal caregiving by friends and family members of patients with cancer is be-coming increasingly common globally with rates continuing to rise. Such caregiving is often emo-tionally and cognitively demanding, resulting in mental exhaustion and high perceived burden. Support for caregivers may be fostered by engagement with the natural environment. Interaction with nature is associated with mental health benefits such as stress reduction and improved well-being. The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the state of the science regarding the use of nat-ural environment interventions to support caregivers of cancer patients in the community. A comprehensive scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the Preferred Re-porting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses assessed natural environment therapies and mental health outcomes among cancer caregivers. Databases searched included CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Alt HealthWatch. Findings recovered a total of five studies over a 10-year period that met criteria, demonstrating a lack of empirical evidence addressing this po-tential resource to support caregivers. Often, study appraisal was not on nature exposure, but ra-ther other aspects of the projects such as program evaluation, exercise, or complementary thera-pies. Both qualitative and quantitative designs were used but sample sizes were small. Caregivers experienced beneficial results across the various studies and future work could enhance these findings.Entities:
Keywords: cancer caregivers; environment; health; integrative therapies; nature; quality of life
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34769643 PMCID: PMC8583496 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182111124
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1PRISMA-ScR diagram of search strategy.
Publications addressing nature-relevant interventions for informal family/friend cancer caregivers.
| Publications | Sample (Age, Sex, Race, Any Co-Morbid Conditions If Mentioned) | Design (Type of Study) | Type of Intervention | Patient Cancer Diagnosis | Measures Used | Study Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carrion-Plaza, et al. (2020). HabitApp: New play technologies in pediatric cancer to improve the psychosocial state of patients and caregivers | 39 Spanish pediatric oncology patients and 39 caregivers (61% female, | Controlled mixed methods pre-post study consisting of 30-minute sessions with pre, during (10 min, 20 min), and post evaluations. Qualitative data were collected during the observation period. | Evaluate use of the HabitApp technological play therapy, a mobile application that permits the observation of animals in their personal habitats from around the world using remote video cameras. | Patients were hematology-oncology patients undergoing cancer treatments—bone marrow transplantation (not at terminal phase). | Observational ad hoc measurement scale (affection, nervousness, proximity to child, reactions, interest, satisfaction) 0–3 ratings; state-trait anxiety inventory; somatic complaints list; positive and Negative experience scale; Mood scale (fear, sadness, happiness, anger); State-Trait Depression Inventory. | Caregivers demonstrated significant improvements in psychosocial factors of affection, proximity, interest, and satisfaction. There were smiling faces and laughter, relaxed conversation, and storytelling between patients and their caregivers. |
| Lavin, et al. (2020). Determining the effect of group flower arranging sessions on caregiver self-efficacy and stress levels in an in-patient hospice | Mixed methods pre-post design. | Participation in a ‘flowers for healing’ class that taught participants how to arrange flowers. Participants shared their flower arrangement with the patient they cared for. | Terminally ill hospice patients. Type of diagnosis not described although cancer caregiving is alluded to in the literature review. | The revised scale for Caregiving self-efficacy; Likert scale (0–5) used to evaluate stress level, sleep, appetite and eating habits, mood, memory, and sense of wellbeing. Participant satisfaction open-ended comments for future changes and recommendations. | ||
| McCullough, t al. (2018). Measuring the effects of an animal-assisted intervention for pediatric oncology patients and their parents: a multisite randomized controlled trial | 106 primary parent caregivers ( | Parallel group randomized trial. | Evaluated the effects of an animal-assisted intervention on stress, anxiety, and health-related quality of life in children with cancer and their parents in five U.S. pediatric hospital sites. Intervention occurred in cancer outpatient setting once per week over 4 months approximately depending on cancer treatment schedules. Sessions average 24 min in length. | Children ( | Pediatric Inventory for Parents used to measure stress; 2 items including 4 subscales: communication; emotional functioning, role functioning, medical care. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (2 20-item scales). | Parents in the intervention group had significant reduction in overall parenting stress post-intervention as compared to the control group ( |
| Sun, et al. (2020). Barriers and facilitators of adherence to a perioperative physical activity intervention for older adults with cancer and their family caregivers | 34 patient-caregiver dyads. Caregivers were 59% female; 82% Caucasian, and 53% were employed. | Qualitative study of the barriers and facilitators to the walking intervention. The caregivers were trained to serve as the patients coach and participated in walking with their patient during the intervention time period. | Evaluation of barriers and facilitators to a physical activity intervention. The peri-operative physical activity intervention was aimed at building the patients physical and psychological function pre-surgery. The dyadic sessions consisted of one-on-one coaching via 5 videoconference and telephone sessions that were delivered pre-surgery, during hospitalization, and 2–4 weeks following surgery. | Lung ( | Data were derived from the physical therapy/occupational therapy notes that were taken during baseline, session 1 before surgery, and inpatient encounter post-surgery. | Family caregivers noted barriers were: co-morbid conditions (pain, arthritis), allergies and sensitivities to walking outdoors, family obligations and work responsibilities, MD appointments, busy schedule, weather, and uneven walking surfaces. |
| Turner (2016). The impact of complementary therapies on cancer patient caregivers’ quality of life | Data were evaluated on 120 users of therapies and 120 non-user cancer caregivers from a large cancer center. Complementary therapy users were primarily female (68%), Caucasian (82%), college educated (64%), and living with a partner (71%). | Secondary analysis of cross-sectional data that compared quality of life data between cancer caregivers who did vs. those who did not participate in cancer center complementary therapies program. | Complementary therapy classes offered to the cancer patients and their caregivers were divided into healing (art, gardening, movement, music, photography, and writing) and fitness (aquatic therapy, cycling, pilates, strength and fitness, walking, and yoga). | Cancer patients at large cancer center. | 51-item quality of life survey (36 quality of life questions; 15 demographic items) with a single open-ended question about the impact of complementary therapies. User data from records about complementary therapy usage. | Complementary therapy uses reported significantly better scores on relationship with others, mental functioning, emotional state, and attitude toward life as compared to non-complementary therapy users. 40% of the use (highest reported along with arts program) were hope blooms gardening. 20% of users also participated in walking and cycling. |