A Systematic Review of Predictors of, and Reasons for, Adherence to Online Psychological Interventions.

This author manuscript is made available following 12 month embargo from the date of publication (March 8 2016) in accordance with publisher copyright policy. The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12529-016-9556-9.PURPOSE: A key issue regarding the provision of psychological therapy in a self-guided online format is low rates of adherence. The aim of this systematic review was to assess both quantitative and qualitative data on the predictors of adherence, as well as participant reported reasons for adhering or not adhering to online psychological interventions. METHODS: Database searches of PsycINFO, Medline, and CINAHL identified 1721 potentially relevant articles published between 1 January 2000 and 25 November 2015. A further 34 potentially relevant articles were retrieved from reference lists. Articles that reported predictors of, or reasons for, adherence to an online psychological intervention were included. RESULTS: A total of 36 studies met the inclusion criteria. Predictors assessed included demographic, psychological, characteristics of presenting problem, and intervention/computer-related predictors. Evidence suggested that female gender, higher treatment expectancy, sufficient time, and personalized intervention content each predicted higher adherence. Age, baseline symptom severity, and control group allocation had mixed findings. The majority of assessed variables however, did not predict adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Few clear predictors of adherence emerged overall, and most results were either mixed or too preliminary to draw conclusions. More research of predictors associated with adherence to online interventions is warranted

Evaluating the efficacy of a self-guided Web-based CBT intervention for reducing cancer-distress: a randomised controlled trial.

The author manuscript is made available following 12 months embargo from date of publication (Aug 7 2015) in accordance with publisher copyright policy. “The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2867-6."Purpose This study evaluated the efficacy of a self-guided Web-based cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) intervention compared to an attention control in improving cancer-related distress, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and maladaptive coping, among people recently diagnosed with cancer. Methods Sixty individuals with cancer diagnosed in the previous 6 months and receiving treatment with curative intent were randomised to receive either the 6-week intervention Cancer Coping Online (CCO: n = 30) or the 6-week Web-based attention control (n = 30). Outcome measures, including cancer distress (the Posttraumatic Stress Scale—Self-Report), general distress (Depression Anxiety Stress Scale), quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30), and coping (mini-MAC), were administered at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and at 3 and 6 months post-intervention. Results Significant main effects for time were found for cancer distress, global QOL, physical function, role function, social function, and anxious preoccupation. Post hoc between-group comparisons showed CCO participants had statistically significantly higher physical functioning compared to controls at 3 months of follow-up (d = −0.52, p = 0.02). Furthermore, compared to controls, post hoc comparisons found moderate between-group effect sizes favouring CCO post-intervention for cancer distress (d = 0.43) and anxious preoccupation (d = 0.38), and at 6 months of follow-up for global QOL (d = −0.43). Conclusions These results provide preliminary support for the potential efficacy of a self-guided Web-based CBT programme in improving aspects of HRQOL, cancer-related distress, and anxious preoccupation after cancer diagnosis. This paper provides justification for, and will help inform the development of, subsequent larger multi-site studies

A qualitative exploration of barriers and facilitatorsto adherence to an online self-help intervention for cancer-related distress

This author accepted manuscript is made available following 12 month embargo from date of publication (March 2017) in accordance with the publisher’s copyright policyObjective This study qualitatively explored barriers and facilitators of adherence to an online psychological intervention for cancer-related distress. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 adults with cancer, randomised to receive either a 6-week intervention (n = 8) or attention control (n = 5) as part of a larger RCT. Transcripts were coded for themes and subthemes, and recruitment ceased when saturation of themes occurred. Results Adherence overall was high: six participants completed all six modules, three completed five modules, two completed four modules, one completed one module, and one did not access the program. The total numbers of barriers (n = 19) and facilitators (n = 17) identified were equivalent and were categorised into five overarching themes: illness factors, psychological factors, personal factors, intervention factors and computer factors. However, the prevalence with which themes were discussed differed: illness factors (specifically cancer treatment side effects) were the main reported barrier to adherence; intervention factors (email reminders, program satisfaction, ease of use, program content) were the most common facilitators. Conclusion While some factors were cited as both facilitating and barring adherence, and therefore reflective of personal preferences and circumstances, a number of recommendations were derived regarding (i) the best timing for online interventions and (ii) the need for multi-platform programs

Web-Based Psychological Interventions for People Living With and Beyond Cancer:Meta-Review of What Works and What Does Not for Maximizing Recruitment, Engagement, and Efficacy

BACKGROUND: Despite high levels of psychological distress experienced by many patients with cancer, previous research has identified several barriers to accessing traditional face-to-face psychological support. Web-based psychosocial interventions have emerged as a promising alternative. OBJECTIVE: This meta-review aimed to synthesize evidence on recruitment challenges and enablers, factors that promote engagement and adherence to web-based intervention content, and factors that promote the efficacy of web-based psychosocial interventions for patients with cancer and cancer survivors. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of previous reviews that investigated the recruitment, engagement, and efficacy of web-based and app-based psychosocial interventions in adult patients with cancer and cancer survivors. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library database for relevant literature. The search terms focused on a combination of topics pertaining to neoplasms and telemedicine. Two independent authors conducted abstract screening, full text screening, and data extraction for each identified article. RESULTS: A total of 20 articles met eligibility criteria. There was inconsistency in the reporting of uptake and engagement data; however, anxiety about technology and perceived time burden were identified as 2 key barriers. Web-based psychosocial oncology interventions demonstrated efficacy in reducing depression and stress but reported weak to mixed findings for distress, anxiety, quality of life, and well-being. Although no factors consistently moderated intervention efficacy, preliminary evidence indicated that multicomponent interventions and greater communication with a health care professional were preferred by participants and were associated with superior effects. CONCLUSIONS: Several consistently cited barriers to intervention uptake and recruitment have emerged, which we recommend future intervention studies address. Preliminary evidence also supports the superior efficacy of multicomponent interventions and interventions that facilitate communication with a health care professional. However, a greater number of appropriately powered clinical trials, including randomized trials with head-to-head comparisons, are needed to enable more confident conclusions regarding which web-based psychosocial oncology interventions work best and for whom. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020202633; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=20263

Psychological support for patients with cancer: evidence review and suggestions for future directions

This is a non-final version of an article published in final form in Hulbert-Williams, N. J., Beatty, L., & Dhillon. H. (2018). Psychological support for patients with cancer: evidence review and suggestions for future research. Current Opinion in Supportive & Palliative Care, 12(3), 276-292.Purpose of the review. Psychological distress and mental health comorbidity are common in cancer. Various therapeutic frameworks have been used for interventions to improve psychological wellbeing and quality of life in cancer patients with mixed results. This paper reviews contributions to that literature published since January 2017. Recent findings. The majority of new psychological intervention research in cancer has used Cognitive Behavioural Therapy or Mindfulness-Based Interventions. Cognitive behavioural Therapy has been considered a gold-standard intervention and recent evidence justifies continuation of this. Recent reviews call into question the validity of evidence for Mindfulness- Based Interventions. A smaller number of trials using Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Meta-Cognitive Therapy, Dignity Therapy and Coaching have emerged, and whilst findings are promising, additional fully-powered trials are required. Weaker evidence exists for counselling, support-based, and Narrative Therapy interventions. Summary. Efficacious, timely and acceptable psychological interventions are a necessary component of comprehensive cancer care. There is some way to go before the evidence conclusively points towards which interventions work for which cancer groups and for which specific outcomes. Methodological limitations must be addressed in future trials; at the forefront remains the need for fully-powered, head-to-head comparison trials

Barriers and facilitators to community-based psycho-oncology services: a qualitative study of health professionals’ attitudes to the feasibility and acceptability of a shared care model

Psychological therapies combined with medication are effective treatments for depression and anxiety in patients with cancer. However, the psycho-oncology workforce is insufficient to meet patient need and is hard to access outside of major cities. To bridge this gap, innovative models of care are required. Implementation of a new model of care requires attention to the facilitators and barriers. The aim of this study was to explore stakeholders' attitudes to the feasibility and acceptability of a community-based, shared care model for the treatment of depression and anxiety.Semi-structured interviews were conducted with community-based clinical psychologists (n=10), general practitioners (n=6) and hospital-based psychologists working in psycho-oncology (n=9). Framework analysis was conducted to identify key themes.All stakeholders perceived the model as feasible and acceptable. Potential barriers/facilitators to implementation were summarised under six key themes: (1) initiative, ownership and autonomy, (2) resources, (3) pathway establishment, (4) support, (5) skill acquisition, and (6) patient engagement. Facilitators included quality communication between health professionals across primary and tertiary care, and appropriate education and support for community-based clinicians.This in-depth exploration of Australian health professionals' perceptions of the feasibility and acceptability of a community-based model of psycho-oncology care revealed that most clinicians were willing to adopt the proposed changes into practice. An RCT of a shared care intervention for depressed patients with cancer is needed

A systematic review and meta-analysis of written self-administered psychosocial interventions among adults with a physical illness

This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This author accepted manuscript is made available following 12 month embargo from date of publication (July 2017) in accordance with the publisher’s archiving policyObjective The cost of implementing professionally-led psychosocial interventions has limited their integration into routine care. To enhance the translation of effective psychosocial interventions in routine care, a self-administered format is sometimes used. The meta-analysis examined the efficacy of written self-administered, psychosocial interventions to improve outcomes among individuals with a physical illness. Methods Studies comparing a written self-administered intervention to a control group were identified through electronic databases searching. Pooled effect sizes were calculated across follow-up time points using random-effects models. Studies were also categorised according to three levels of guidance (self-administered, minimal contact, or guided) to examine the effect of this variable on outcomes. Results Forty manuscripts were retained for the descriptive review and 28 for the meta-analysis. Findings were significant for anxiety, depression, distress, and self-efficacy. Results were not significant for quality of life and related domains as well as coping. Purely self-administered interventions were efficacious for depression, distress, and self-efficacy; only guided interventions had an impact on anxiety. Conclusions Findings showed that written self-administered interventions show promise across a number of outcomes. Practice implications Self-administered interventions are a potentially efficacious and cost-effective approach to address some of the most common needs of patients with a physical illness

Uptake and adherence to an online intervention for cancer-related distress: older age is not a barrier to adherence but may be a barrier to uptake

Purpose: While online interventions are increasingly explored as an alternative to therapist-based interventions for cancer-related distress, limitations to efficacy potentially include low uptake and adherence. Few predictors of uptake or adherence to online interventions have been consistently identified, particularly in individuals with cancer. This study examined rates and predictors of uptake and adherence to Finding My Way, a RCT of an online intervention versus an information-only online control for cancer-related distress. Methods: Participants were adults with cancer treated with curative intent. Adherence was assessed by login frequency, duration and activity level; analyses examined demographic, medical and psychological predictors of uptake and adherence. Results: The study enrolled 191 adults (aged 26–94 years) undergoing active treatment for cancer of any type. Uptake was highest for females and for individuals with ovarian (80%) and breast cancer (49.8%), and lowest for those with melanoma (26.5%). Adherence was predicted by older age and control-group allocation. Baseline distress levels did not predict adherence. High adherers to the full intervention had better emotion regulation and quality of life than low adherers. Conclusions: Uptake of online intervention varies according to age, gender and cancer type. While uptake was higher amongst younger individuals, once enrolled, older individuals were more likely to adhere to online interventions for cancer-related distressThis work was conducted as part of a larger clinical trial, supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council (grant number 1042942)