PURPOSE: To provide a detailed description of rehabilitation problems of women, considered to be low risk and at risk for psychosocial morbidity, diagnosed with stage I and II breast cancer 1 month and 1 year after primary treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A sample of 227 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients were systematically interviewed by a clinical social worker and classified for risk of psychosocial distress in the year after diagnosis. They completed a battery of standardized instruments to assess quality of life (QL), rehabilitation needs, and psychologic distress. The primary QL instrument, the Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System (CARES), provides a detailed listing of rehabilitation needs. Descriptive CARES data are presented with comparisons between the two groups. RESULTS: The at-risk women had significantly more problems with greater severity than the low-risk women in all areas (physical, psychosocial, medical interaction, sexual, and marital). While both groups showed improvement over the year following diagnosis, the at-risk group had significantly more problems 1 year later. Many physical problems subside, but problems at the local surgical site, psychologic distress, communication with marital partners, and negative body image are more persistent in the at-risk group 1 year later, while half of both groups continue to have sexual dysfunction. CONCLUSION: The detailed listing of problems provided by the CARES may be helpful to clinicians in their interactions with patients. The need for preventive and early intervention for the at-risk patients is underscored.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To provide a detailed description of rehabilitation problems of women, considered to be low risk and at risk for psychosocial morbidity, diagnosed with stage I and II breast cancer 1 month and 1 year after primary treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A sample of 227 newly diagnosed breast cancerpatients were systematically interviewed by a clinical social worker and classified for risk of psychosocial distress in the year after diagnosis. They completed a battery of standardized instruments to assess quality of life (QL), rehabilitation needs, and psychologic distress. The primary QL instrument, the Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System (CARES), provides a detailed listing of rehabilitation needs. Descriptive CARES data are presented with comparisons between the two groups. RESULTS: The at-risk women had significantly more problems with greater severity than the low-risk women in all areas (physical, psychosocial, medical interaction, sexual, and marital). While both groups showed improvement over the year following diagnosis, the at-risk group had significantly more problems 1 year later. Many physical problems subside, but problems at the local surgical site, psychologic distress, communication with marital partners, and negative body image are more persistent in the at-risk group 1 year later, while half of both groups continue to have sexual dysfunction. CONCLUSION: The detailed listing of problems provided by the CARES may be helpful to clinicians in their interactions with patients. The need for preventive and early intervention for the at-risk patients is underscored.
Authors: Michael H Antoni; Suzanne C Lechner; Aisha Kazi; Sarah R Wimberly; Tammy Sifre; Kenya R Urcuyo; Kristin Phillips; Stefan Glück; Charles S Carver Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2006-12
Authors: Kimlin T Ashing-Giwa; Judith S Tejero; Jinsook Kim; Geraldine V Padilla; Gerhard Hellemann Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2007-02-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Salene M Wu; Tammy A Schuler; Michael C Edwards; Hae-Chung Yang; Brittany M Brothers Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2012-08-18 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Bonnie B Blomberg; Juan P Alvarez; Alain Diaz; Maria G Romero; Suzanne C Lechner; Charles S Carver; Heather Holley; Michael H Antoni Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2009-09-24 Impact factor: 3.006