nach oben

Supportive Care in Cancer

Erschienen in:

02.04.2016 | Original Article

Appraisals, perceived dyadic communication, and quality of life over time among couples coping with prostate cancer

verfasst von: Lixin Song, Christine Rini, Katrina R. Ellis, Laurel L. Northouse

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 9/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Little research has examined how prostate cancer patients’ and their spouses’ appraisals of illness and quality of life (QOL) interact with one another. This study examined the interdependent relationships between their appraisals of illness and QOL and if their perceived dyadic communication mediated these relationships.

Methods

We used the Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Model (APIMeM) approach to conduct a secondary analysis of longitudinal data from 124 prostate cancer patient-spouse dyads. We examined actor effects (each person’s influence on his/her own outcomes) and partner effects (each person’s influence on his/her partner’s outcomes). Appraisals of illness, perceived dyadic communication, and QOL were measured using Appraisal of Illness Scale, Lewis Mutuality and Interpersonal Sensitivity Scale, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy General Scale, respectively. Analyses controlled for effects of prostate cancer symptoms and demographic factors.

Results

Among actor effects, spouses with more negative appraisals at baseline perceived worse dyadic communication 4 months later (p < .05) and worse QOL 8 months later (p < .001). Patients and spouses who perceived more dyadic communication at 4 months had better QOL at 8 months (p < .01). Among partner effects, there was only weak evidence for an association between patient perceived dyadic communication at 4 months and better spouse QOL at 8 months of follow-up (p = .05). No mediation effects were found.

Conclusions

Patients’ and spouses’ appraisals of the illness and their dyadic communication were associated with their long-term QOL. Interventions that reduce negative appraisals of illness and promote dyadic communication may improve QOL for both patients with prostate cancer and their spouses.

American Cancer Society (2012) Cancer Facts & Figures 2012, Atlanta

Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol 51:1173–1182CrossRefPubMed

Bodenmann G (2005) Dyadic coping and its signi!cant for marital functioning. In: Revenson T, Kayser K, Bodenmann G (eds) Couples coping with stress: Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., pp. 33–50CrossRef

Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, Linn E, Bonomi A, Silberman M, Yellen SB, Winicour P, Brannon J, et al. (1993) The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol 11:570–579PubMed

Cook WL, Kenny DA (2005) The Actor-Partner Interdependence Model: a model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. Int J Behav Dev 29:101CrossRef

Crook JM, Gomez-Iturriaga A, Wallace K, Ma C, Fung S, Alibhai S, Jewett M, Fleshner N (2011) Comparison of health-related quality of life 5 years after SPIRIT: surgical prostatectomy versus interstitial radiation intervention trial. J Clin Oncol 29:362–368CrossRefPubMed

Eisemann N, Waldmann A, Rohde V, Katalinic A (2014) Quality of life in partners of patients with localised prostate cancer. Qual Life Res 23:1557–1568CrossRefPubMed

Ezer H, Chachamovich JL, Chachamovich E (2011) Do men and their wives see it the same way? Congruence within Couples during the first year of prostate cancer. Psycho-Oncol 20:155–164CrossRef

Galbraith ME, Fink R, Wilkins GG (2011) Couples surviving prostate cancer: challenges in their lives and relationships. Semin Oncol Nurs 27:300–308CrossRefPubMed

10.

Green HJ, Wells DJN, Laakso L (2011) Coping in men with prostate cancer and their partners: a quantitative and qualitative study. Eur J Cancer Care 20:237–247CrossRef

11.

Hagedoorn M, Sanderman R, Bolks HN, Tuinstra J, Coyne JC (2008) Distress in couples coping with cancer: a meta-analysis and critical review of role and gender effects. Psychol Bull 134:1–30CrossRefPubMed

12.

Harden JK, Sanda MG, Wei JT, Yarandi H, Hembroff L, Hardy J, Northouse LL (2013) Partners’ long-term appraisal of their caregiving experience, marital satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and quality of life 2 years after prostate cancer treatment. Cancer Nurs 36:104–113CrossRefPubMed

13.

Helgeson VS, Novak SA, Lepore SJ, Eton DT (2004) Spouse social control efforts: relations to health behavior and well-being among men with prostate cancer. J Soc Pers Relat 21:53–68CrossRef

14.

Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Neyman N, Aminou R, Waldron W, Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, Cho H, Mariotto A, Eisner MP, Lewis DR, Chen HS, Feuer EJ, Cronin KA, Edwards BK (2011) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2008. National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2008/, posted to the SEER web site, 2011

15.

Hu L-t, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6:1–55CrossRef

16.

Kelley HH, Thibaut JW (1978) Interpersonal relations: a theory of interdependence. Wiley, New York

17.

Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Cook WL (2006) Dyadic data analysis. The Guilford Press, New York, NY

18.

Kershaw T, Mood D, Newth G, Ronis DL, Sanda M, Vaishampayan U, LL N (2008) Longitudinal analysis of a model to predict quality of life in prostate cancer patients and their spouses. Ann Behav Med 36:117–128CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Lazarus RS, Folkman S (1984) Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer Publishing Company, New York

20.

Lewis FM (1996) Family home visitation study final report. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health

21.

Lewis FM (2010) The Family’s “Stuck Points” in adjusting to cancer. In: Holland JC, Breitbart WS, Jacobsen PB, Lederberg MS, Loscalzo MJ, McCorkle R (eds) Psycho-oncology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 511–515CrossRef

22.

Macho S, Ledermann T (2011) Estimating, testing, and comparing specific effects in structural equation models: the phantom model approach. Psychol Methods 16:34–43CrossRefPubMed

23.

Manne S, Badr H, Zaider T, Nelson C, Kissane D (2010) Cancer-related communication, relationship intimacy, and psychological distress among couples coping with localized prostate cancer. J Cancer Surviv 4:74–85CrossRefPubMed

24.

McCubbin HI, Thompson AI (1991) Family typologies and family assessment. In: McCubbin HI, Thompson AI (eds) Family assessment Inventories for research and practice. The University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin

25.

McCubbin MA, McCubbin HI (1991) Family stress theory and assessment. In: McCubbin HI, Thompson AI (eds) Family assessment Inventories for research and Practice. The University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin

26.

Mood D, Song L, Kershaw T, Northouse L (2007) Assessing risk for distress in cancer patients and family caregivers. Oncol Nurs Forum 34:233

27.

Muthen L, Muthen B (2015) Mplus user’s guide. Mplus User’s Guide. Sixth Edition, Los Angeles

28.

Northouse L, Kershaw T, Mood D, Schafenacker A (2005) Effects of a family intervention on the quality of life of women with recurrent breast cancer and their family caregivers. Psycho-Oncol 14:478–491CrossRef

29.

Northouse LL, Mood D, Kershaw T, Schafenacker A, Mellon S, Walker J, Galvin E, Decker V (2002) Quality of Life of women with recurrent breast cancer and their family members. J Clin Oncol 20:4050–4064CrossRefPubMed

30.

Northouse LL, Mood D, Montie JE, Sandler HM, Forman JD, Hussain M, Pienta K, Smith DC, Sanda MG, Kershaw T (2007) Living with prostate cancer: patients’ and spouses’ psychosocial status and quality of life. J Clin Oncol 25:4171–4177CrossRefPubMed

31.

Northouse LL, Mood DW, Schafenacker A, Kalemkerian G, Zalupski M, Lorusso P, Hayes DF, Hussain M, Ruckdeschel J, Fendrick AM, Trask PC, Ronis DL, Kershaw T (2013) Randomized clinical trial of a brief and extensive dyadic intervention for advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers. Psycho-Oncology 22:555–563CrossRefPubMed

32.

Northouse LL, Mood DW, Schafenacker A, Montie JE, Sandler HM, Forman JD, Hussain M, Pienta KJ, Smith DC, Kershaw T (2007) Randomized clinical trial of a family intervention for prostate cancer patients and their spouses. Cancer 110:2809–2818CrossRefPubMed

33.

Oberst M (1991) Appraisal of caregiving scale: Manual for use. Manual for Use. Wayne State University, Detroit, Appraisal of Caregiving Scale

34.

Oberst M (1991) Appraisal of illness scale: Manual for use. Appraisal of Illness Scale: Manual for Use. Wayne State University, Detroit

35.

Penedo FJ, Benedict C, Zhou ES, Rasheed M, Traeger L, Kava BR, Soloway M, Czaja S, Antoni MH (2013) Association of stress management skills and perceived stress with physical and emotional well-being among advanced prostrate cancer survivors following androgen deprivation treatment. J Clin Psychol Med Settings 20:25–32CrossRefPubMed

36.

Prince-Paul M (2008) Relationships among communicative acts, social well-being, and spiritual well-being on the quality of life at the end of life in patients with cancer enrolled in hospice. J Palli Med 11:20–25CrossRef

37.

Regan TW, Lambert SD, Kelly B, Falconier M, Kissane D, Levesque JV (2015) Couples coping with cancer: exploration of theoretical frameworks from dyadic studies. Psycho-oncology 24:1605–1617

38.

Rusbult C, Van Lange P (1996) Interdependence processes. In: Higgins E, Kruglanski A (eds) Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. The Guilford Press, New York, pp. pp. 564–pp. 596

39.

Segrin C, Badger TA, Harrington J (2012) Interdependent psychological quality of life in dyads adjusting to prostate cancer health psychology: official journal of the Division of Health Psychology. Am Psychol Assoc 31:70–79

40.

Song L, Northouse LL, Braun TM, Zhang L, Cimprich B, Ronis DL, Mood DW (2011) Assessing longitudinal quality of life in prostate cancer patients and their spouses: a multilevel modeling approach. Qual Life Res 20:371–381CrossRefPubMed

41.

Song L, Northouse LL, Zhang L, Braun TM, Cimprich B, Ronis DL, Mood DW (2010) Study of dyadic communication in couples managing prostate cancer: a longitudinal perspective. Psycho-Oncology 21(1):72–81CrossRefPubMed

42.

Traa MJ, De Vries J Fau - Bodenmann G, Bodenmann G Fau - Den Oudsten BL, Den Oudsten BL (2015) Dyadic coping and relationship functioning in couples coping with cancer: a systematic review. Br J Health Psychol 20:85–114

43.

Wei JT, Dunn RL, Litwin MS, Sandler HM, Sanda MG (2000) Development and validation of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology 56:899–905CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Appraisals, perceived dyadic communication, and quality of life over time among couples coping with prostate cancer
verfasst von: Lixin Song
Christine Rini
Katrina R. Ellis
Laurel L. Northouse
Publikationsdatum: 02.04.2016
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 9/2016
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-016-3188-0

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

25.04.2024 | Nierenkarzinom | Nachrichten

Springer Medizin

Appraisals, perceived dyadic communication, and quality of life over time among couples coping with prostate cancer

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

Alectinib verbessert krankheitsfreies Überleben bei ALK-positivem NSCLC

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Update Onkologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2016

“An addendum to breast cancer”: the triple negative experience

Meta-analysis of cardiovascular toxicity risks in cancer patients on selected targeted agents

A multicenter study on the relative effectiveness of a 12-week physical training program for adults with an oncologic diagnosis

Randomized pilot trial of yoga versus strengthening exercises in breast cancer survivors with cancer-related fatigue

Oncologists’ experiences of discussing complementary and alternative treatment options with their cancer patients. A qualitative analysis

Control of nausea with palonosetron versus granisetron, both combined with dexamethasone, in patients receiving cisplatin- or anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide-based regimens

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

Alectinib verbessert krankheitsfreies Überleben bei ALK-positivem NSCLC

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Update Onkologie