Testing the Treatment Integrity of the Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully Psychotherapeutic Intervention for Patients With Advanced Cancer

Introduction: The Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) therapy for patients with advanced cancer was tested against a supportive psycho-oncological counseling intervention (SPI) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We investigated whether CALM was delivered as intended (therapists’ adherence); whether CALM therapists with less experience in psycho-oncological care show higher adherence scores; and whether potential overlapping treatment elements between CALM and SPI can be identified (treatment differentiation). Methods: Two trained and blinded raters assessed on 19 items four subscales of the Treatment Integrity Scale covering treatment domains of CALM (SC: Symptom Management and Communication with Health Care Providers; CSR: Changes in Self and Relationship with Others; SMP: Spiritual Well-being and Sense of Meaning and Purpose; FHM: Preparing for the Future, Sustaining Hope and Facing Mortality). A random sample of 150 audio recordings (75 CALM, 75 SPI) were rated on a threepoint Likert scale with 1 = “adherent to some extent,” 2 = “adherent to a sufficient extent,” 3 = “very adherent.” Results: All 19 treatment elements were applied, but in various frequencies. CALM therapists most frequently explored symptoms and/or relationship to health care providers (SC_1: n_applied = 62; 83%) and allowed expression of sadness and anxiety about the progression of disease (FHM_2: n_applied = 62; 83%). The exploration of CALM treatment element SC_1 was most frequently implemented in a satisfactory or excellent manner (n_sufficient or very adherent = 34; 45%), whereas the treatment element SMP_4: Therapist promotes acknowledgment that some life goals may no longer be achievable (n_sufficient or very adherent = 0; 0%) was not implemented in a satisfactory manner. In terms of treatment differentiation, no treatment elements could be identified which were applied significantly more often by CALM therapists than by SPI therapists. Conclusion: Results verify the application of CALM treatment domains. However, CALM therapists’ adherence scores indicated manual deviations. Furthermore, raters were not able to significantly distinguish CALM from SPI, implying that overlapping treatment elements were delivered to patients

Efficacy of a brief manualized intervention Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) adapted to German cancer care settings: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Although psycho-oncological interventions have been shown to significantly reduce symptoms of anxiety and depression and enhance quality of life, a substantial number of patients with advanced cancer do not receive psycho-oncological interventions tailored to their individual situation. Given the lack of reliable data on the efficacy of psycho-oncological interventions in palliative care settings, we aim to examine the efficacy of a brief, manualized individual psychotherapy for patients with advanced cancer: Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM). CALM aims to reduce depression and death anxiety, to strengthen communication with health care providers, and to enhance hope and meaning in life. We adapted the intervention for German cancer care settings. Methods/Design: We use a single-blinded randomized-controlled trial design with two treatment conditions: intervention group (IG, CALM) and control group (CG). Patients in the CG receive a usual non-manualized supportive psycho-oncological intervention (SPI). Patients are randomized between the IG and CG and assessed at baseline (t0), after three (t1) and after 6 months (t2). We include patients with a malignant solid tumor who have tumor stages of III or IV (UICC classification). Patients who are included in the study are at least 18 years old, speak German fluently, score greater than or equal to nine on the PHQ-9 or/and greater than or equal to five on the Distress Thermometer. It is further necessary that there is no evidence of severe cognitive impairments. We measure depression, anxiety, distress, quality of life, demoralization, symptom distress, fatigue as well as spiritual well-being, posttraumatic growth and close relationship experiences using validated questionnaires. We hypothesize that patients in the IG will show a significantly lower level of depression 6 months after baseline compared to patients in the CG. We further hypothesize a significant reduction in anxiety and fatigue as well as significant improvements in psychological and spiritual well-being, meaning and post-traumatic growth in the IG compared to CG 6 months after baseline. Discussion: Our study will contribute important statistical evidence on whether CALM can reduce depression and existential distress in a German sample of advanced and highly distressed cancer patients

Testing the Treatment Integrity of the Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully Psychotherapeutic Intervention for Patients With Advanced Cancer

Introduction: The Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) therapy for patients with advanced cancer was tested against a supportive psycho-oncological counseling intervention (SPI) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We investigated whether CALM was delivered as intended (therapists’ adherence); whether CALM therapists with less experience in psycho-oncological care show higher adherence scores; and whether potential overlapping treatment elements between CALM and SPI can be identified (treatment differentiation). Methods: Two trained and blinded raters assessed on 19 items four subscales of the Treatment Integrity Scale covering treatment domains of CALM (SC: Symptom Management and Communication with Health Care Providers; CSR: Changes in Self and Relationship with Others; SMP: Spiritual Well-being and Sense of Meaning and Purpose; FHM: Preparing for the Future, Sustaining Hope and Facing Mortality). A random sample of 150 audio recordings (75 CALM, 75 SPI) were rated on a threepoint Likert scale with 1 = “adherent to some extent,” 2 = “adherent to a sufficient extent,” 3 = “very adherent.” Results: All 19 treatment elements were applied, but in various frequencies. CALM therapists most frequently explored symptoms and/or relationship to health care providers (SC_1: n_applied = 62; 83%) and allowed expression of sadness and anxiety about the progression of disease (FHM_2: n_applied = 62; 83%). The exploration of CALM treatment element SC_1 was most frequently implemented in a satisfactory or excellent manner (n_sufficient or very adherent = 34; 45%), whereas the treatment element SMP_4: Therapist promotes acknowledgment that some life goals may no longer be achievable (n_sufficient or very adherent = 0; 0%) was not implemented in a satisfactory manner. In terms of treatment differentiation, no treatment elements could be identified which were applied significantly more often by CALM therapists than by SPI therapists. Conclusion: Results verify the application of CALM treatment domains. However, CALM therapists’ adherence scores indicated manual deviations. Furthermore, raters were not able to significantly distinguish CALM from SPI, implying that overlapping treatment elements were delivered to patients

Measuring the psychosocial dimensions of quality of life in advanced cancer patients: psychometrics of the German Quality of Life at the End of Life–Cancer–Psychosocial (QUAL-EC-P) Questionnaire

Context: Quality of life (QoL) is a central focus of care in advanced cancer. Specialized instruments, such as the Quality of Life at the End of Life-Cancer (QUAL-EC), may be useful to assess psychosocial issues associated with QoL unique to this population. Objectives: To evaluate the measurement of the psychosocial dimensions of QoL using the German translation of the QUAL-EC-Psychosocial (QUAL-EC-P) questionnaire, including factor structure and psychometrics. Methods: About 183 patients with advanced cancer from the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf and University Medical Center Leipzig completed the QUAL-EC-P questionnaire. We conducted exploratory factor analysis as well as item and reliability analysis. We examined convergent validity with correlations between the scale and relevant psychological constructs. Results: The sample was 60% female with mean age of 57.7 (SD = 11.7). We extracted three factors accounting for 44% of the variance aligning with the structure of the instrument. The QUAL-EC-P questionnaire showed good to acceptable internal consistency for the QoL-psychosocial total score (α = 0.77), the Life completion subscale (α = 0.77), and the Relationship with health care provider subscale (α = 0.81). The Preparation for end of life subscale had adequate albeit low internal consistency (α = 0.64) because concerns about family were less associated with financial worry and fear of death than expected. The psychosocial dimensions of QoL correlated negatively with depression (r = −0.27, P ≤ 0.001), anxiety (r = −0.32, P ≤ 0.001), demoralization (r = −0.63, P ≤ 0.001), and attachment insecurity (r = −0.51, P ≤ 0.001) and positively with spiritual well-being (r = 0.63, P ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: The QUAL-EC-P questionnaire may be used to assess the psychosocial aspects of QoL and promote their clinical discussion in patients with advanced cancer

Testing the Treatment Integrity of the Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully Psychotherapeutic Intervention for Patients With Advanced Cancer

Introduction: The Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) therapy for patients with advanced cancer was tested against a supportive psycho-oncological counseling intervention (SPI) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We investigated whether CALM was delivered as intended (therapists’ adherence); whether CALM therapists with less experience in psycho-oncological care show higher adherence scores; and whether potential overlapping treatment elements between CALM and SPI can be identified (treatment differentiation). Methods: Two trained and blinded raters assessed on 19 items four subscales of the Treatment Integrity Scale covering treatment domains of CALM (SC: Symptom Management and Communication with Health Care Providers; CSR: Changes in Self and Relationship with Others; SMP: Spiritual Well-being and Sense of Meaning and Purpose; FHM: Preparing for the Future, Sustaining Hope and Facing Mortality). A random sample of 150 audio recordings (75 CALM, 75 SPI) were rated on a threepoint Likert scale with 1 = “adherent to some extent,” 2 = “adherent to a sufficient extent,” 3 = “very adherent.” Results: All 19 treatment elements were applied, but in various frequencies. CALM therapists most frequently explored symptoms and/or relationship to health care providers (SC_1: n_applied = 62; 83%) and allowed expression of sadness and anxiety about the progression of disease (FHM_2: n_applied = 62; 83%). The exploration of CALM treatment element SC_1 was most frequently implemented in a satisfactory or excellent manner (n_sufficient or very adherent = 34; 45%), whereas the treatment element SMP_4: Therapist promotes acknowledgment that some life goals may no longer be achievable (n_sufficient or very adherent = 0; 0%) was not implemented in a satisfactory manner. In terms of treatment differentiation, no treatment elements could be identified which were applied significantly more often by CALM therapists than by SPI therapists. Conclusion: Results verify the application of CALM treatment domains. However, CALM therapists’ adherence scores indicated manual deviations. Furthermore, raters were not able to significantly distinguish CALM from SPI, implying that overlapping treatment elements were delivered to patients

Attachment insecurity in advanced cancer patients: psychometric properties of the German version of the Brief Experiences in Close Relationships Scale (ECR-M16-G)

Context: Attachment insecurity refers to difficulty in trusting and relying on others in times of need. Its underlying factors attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance have been empirically associated with impaired coping in advanced cancer and, therefore, should be considered in individually tailored medical and psychosocial treatment. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the German translation of the Brief Experiences in Close Relationships Scale (ECR-M16-G). Methods: We recruited 182 advanced cancer patients from outpatient psycho-oncology clinics of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf and the University Medical Center Leipzig, local and external cancer care facilities. We performed confirmatory factor analysis to replicate the higher order factor structure reported in previous research. We conducted item and reliability analysis, also correlation analysis, to examine concurrent validity. Results: One hundred fifty-eight patients completed the ECR-M16-G (women 61%, mean age 57.9, SD = 11.1). We replicated the factor structure with the subscales Attachment Anxiety and Attachment Avoidance as second-order factors and Worrying about relationships, Frustration about unavailability, Discomfort with close others, and Turning away from others as first-order factors. An adjusted model that interchanged factor loadings of items 4 and 10 showed good fit (Comparative Fit Index = 0.94, Non-Normed Fit Index = 0.93, root mean square error of approximation = 0.05). Subscales showed acceptable to good internal consistency (anxiety α = .81 and avoidance α = .78). Attachment insecurity (mean = 3.1, SD = 1.0) was positively associated with depression, anxiety, demoralization (P < 0.001), and symptom burden (P = 0.02) and negatively associated with spiritual well-being (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The ECR-M16-G is a valid and reliable measure of attachment insecurity in patients with advanced cancer and can be recommended as a tool for clinical care and further research

Need for additional professional psychosocial and spiritual support in patients with advanced diseases in the course of specialist palliative care – a longitudinal observational study

Background: We investigated the need for additional professional support and associated factors in patients (pts) at initiation and in the course of in- and outpatient specialist palliative care (I-SPC/O-SPC). Methods: Pts entering an urban SPC network consecutively completed questionnaires on psychosocial/spiritual problems and support needs within 72 h (T0) as well as within the first 6 weeks (T1) of SPC. Hierarchical linear regression analysis was used to investigate the impact of sociodemographic / disease-related variables, psychological / physical burden, social support, and SPC setting on the extent of support needs. Results: Four hundred twenty-five pts (70 years, 48% female, 91% cancer, 67% O-SPC) answered at T0, and 167 at T1. At T0, main problems related to transportation, usual activities, and dependency (83-89%). At T1, most prevalent problems also related to transportation and usual activities and additionally to light housework (82-86%). At T0, support needs were highest for transportation, light housework, and usual activities (35-41%). Cross-sectional comparisons of SPC settings revealed higher problem scores in O-SPC compared to I-SPC at T0 (p = .039), but not at T1. Support need scores were higher in O-SPC at T0 (p &amp;lt; .001), but lower at T1 (p = .039). Longitudinal analyses showed a decrease of support need scores over time, independent from the SPC setting. At T0, higher distress (p = .047), anxiety/depression (p &amp;lt; .001), physical symptom burden (p &amp;lt; .001) and I-SPC (p &amp;lt; .001) were associated with higher support need scores (at T1: only higher distress, p = .037). Conclusion: Need for additional professional psychosocial/spiritual support was identified in up to 40% of pts. with higher need at the beginning of O-SPC than of I-SPC. During SPC, this need decreased in both settings, but got lower in O-SPC than in I-SPC over time. Support need scores were not only associated with psychological, but also physical burden

Death-related anxiety in patients with advanced cancer: validation of the German version of the Death and Dying Distress Scale

Context: Distress and anxiety about issues related to death and dying is commonly experienced in patients with advanced disease and a limited life expectancy. Objectives: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the German version of the Death and Dying Distress Scale (DADDS-G) in advanced cancer patients. Methods: We recruited advanced patients with mixed tumor entities (Union for International Cancer Control [UICC] Stage III/IV) treated in two German University Medical Centers during their outpatient treatment. After testing a preliminary version of the state-of-the-art translated original Death and Dying Distress Scale, we analyzed the psychometric properties of the shortened nine-item adapted DADDS-G using validated instruments measuring distress, anxiety, depression, fear of progression, and quality of life. Results: We obtained complete questionnaires from 77 of 93 patients with advanced cancer (response rate: 83%). Participants were mostly married or cohabiting (75%), well-educated, and both sexes were almost equally represented (52% men; mean age 58 years, SD = 12). The total mean DADDS-G score was 13.3 (SD = 8.5). Patients reported to be most distressed by the feeling of being a burden to others. The exploratory factor analysis led to one factor that accounted for more than 59% of the variance. The DADDS-G's internal consistency was excellent with Cronbach alpha = 0.91. The confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated a very good model fit. Death-related anxiety was significantly associated with distress, depression, anxiety, fear of progression, and lower quality of life (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Results provide further evidence that the DADDS-G is a valid and reliable instrument of high clinical relevance for use in patients with advanced cancer