Adopting a Dyadic Approach to Treating Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue: A Mixed Methods Study to Assess Patients’ and Partners’ Needs, Benefits, Barriers and Preferences

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES European Journal of Cancer Care Pub Date : 2025-01-16 DOI:10.1155/ecc/8313220
Sophie I. van Dongen, Fabiola Müller, Rosalie A. M. van Woezik, Mariët Hagedoorn, Marije L. van der Lee
{"title":"Adopting a Dyadic Approach to Treating Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue: A Mixed Methods Study to Assess Patients’ and Partners’ Needs, Benefits, Barriers and Preferences","authors":"Sophie I. van Dongen,&nbsp;Fabiola Müller,&nbsp;Rosalie A. M. van Woezik,&nbsp;Mariët Hagedoorn,&nbsp;Marije L. van der Lee","doi":"10.1155/ecc/8313220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><b>Introduction:</b> Chronic cancer-related fatigue (CCRF) is a common symptom among patients. Current therapies target the patient alone, while evidence suggests that targeting the dyad might be more beneficial.</p>\n <p><b>Method:</b> Using a mixed methods design, we conducted two studies that together aimed to provide more insight into the needs, benefits, barriers and preferences regarding a couples therapy for CCRF. In a qualitative study, we conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 patients and 10 partners with experience of CCRF care, followed by thematic analysis. In a subsequent quantitative study, a convenience sample of patients (<i>n</i> = 172) and partners (<i>n</i> = 55) completed an online survey developed based on the qualitative findings.</p>\n <p><b>Results:</b> In the qualitative study, both patients and partners expressed that a couples therapy could help them. Perceived benefits included empowerment of partners to support patients and improved couples communication. In the online survey, the need for a dyadic approach to CCRF therapy was confirmed by both patients (39%) and partners (91%). The benefits reported by most patients and partners were that partners could get attention for their own problems related to the patients’ cancer and fatigue (patients: 72%, partners: 86%) and receive advice on coping with fatigue (66% and 90%, respectively). Participants in both studies identified barriers, such as a fear of burdening partners with a couples therapy (50%). Partner involvement was considered desirable for most therapy elements (e.g., psychoeducation, contact with the therapist, exercises and relapse prevention). Yet, individual preferences varied widely.</p>\n <p><b>Conclusion:</b> Results of both studies support the potential acceptability of a couples therapy for CCRF among patients and partners. Based on divergent preferences, we determined that a couples therapy must provide flexibility regarding the degree, intensity and type of partner involvement. Dyadic psychoeducation can be used as a solid starting point to manage expectations and get relief from perceived barriers.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11953,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Cancer Care","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ecc/8313220","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Cancer Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/ecc/8313220","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Chronic cancer-related fatigue (CCRF) is a common symptom among patients. Current therapies target the patient alone, while evidence suggests that targeting the dyad might be more beneficial.

Method: Using a mixed methods design, we conducted two studies that together aimed to provide more insight into the needs, benefits, barriers and preferences regarding a couples therapy for CCRF. In a qualitative study, we conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 patients and 10 partners with experience of CCRF care, followed by thematic analysis. In a subsequent quantitative study, a convenience sample of patients (n = 172) and partners (n = 55) completed an online survey developed based on the qualitative findings.

Results: In the qualitative study, both patients and partners expressed that a couples therapy could help them. Perceived benefits included empowerment of partners to support patients and improved couples communication. In the online survey, the need for a dyadic approach to CCRF therapy was confirmed by both patients (39%) and partners (91%). The benefits reported by most patients and partners were that partners could get attention for their own problems related to the patients’ cancer and fatigue (patients: 72%, partners: 86%) and receive advice on coping with fatigue (66% and 90%, respectively). Participants in both studies identified barriers, such as a fear of burdening partners with a couples therapy (50%). Partner involvement was considered desirable for most therapy elements (e.g., psychoeducation, contact with the therapist, exercises and relapse prevention). Yet, individual preferences varied widely.

Conclusion: Results of both studies support the potential acceptability of a couples therapy for CCRF among patients and partners. Based on divergent preferences, we determined that a couples therapy must provide flexibility regarding the degree, intensity and type of partner involvement. Dyadic psychoeducation can be used as a solid starting point to manage expectations and get relief from perceived barriers.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Cancer Care
European Journal of Cancer Care 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.80%
发文量
213
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Cancer Care aims to encourage comprehensive, multiprofessional cancer care across Europe and internationally. It publishes original research reports, literature reviews, guest editorials, letters to the Editor and special features on current issues affecting the care of cancer patients. The Editor welcomes contributions which result from team working or collaboration between different health and social care providers, service users, patient groups and the voluntary sector in the areas of: - Primary, secondary and tertiary care for cancer patients - Multidisciplinary and service-user involvement in cancer care - Rehabilitation, supportive, palliative and end of life care for cancer patients - Policy, service development and healthcare evaluation in cancer care - Psychosocial interventions for patients and family members - International perspectives on cancer care
期刊最新文献
Elevated CA15-3 Levels in Myeloid Disorders: Clinicopathological Correlation Adopting a Dyadic Approach to Treating Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue: A Mixed Methods Study to Assess Patients’ and Partners’ Needs, Benefits, Barriers and Preferences Awareness and Knowledge of Chemotherapy Among Cancer Patients at Suresh Wagle Memorial Cancer Centre, Kathmandu Improving Sexual Well-Being Support for Men With Prostate Cancer: The Health Professional Perspective Comparison of Nobiletin and 5-Demethylnobiletin as Cancer Chemopreventive Agents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1