52 research outputs found

    Economic evaluations of psychosocial interventions in cancer: A systematic review

    Get PDF
    Objective: Although the effectiveness of many psychosocial interventions for people with cancer has been established, one barrier to implementation in routine clinical care is a lack of data on cost-effectiveness. We conducted a systematic review to assess the cost-effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for improving psychological adjustment among people with cancer. Methods: Systematic review of the literature, study appraisal, and narrative synthesis. Results: Eight studies involving 1,668 patients were identified. Four of these reported outcomes in a cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) framework. Six studies reported psychosocial interventions to be cost-effective for improving health-related quality of life, mood, pain, distress, or fear of cancer progression, compared to usual care. Of the six psychosocial interventions identified as cost-effective, three were cognitive behavioural therapy based interventions, one was a nurse-delivered telephone follow-up plus educational group program, one was a group-based exercise and psychosocial intervention, and one was a series of 10 face-to-face or telephone-based individual support sessions delivered by a nurse. The quality of studies according to the CHEC-list criteria was good overall; however, some studies were limited by their choice of outcome measure and omission of important categories of costs. Conclusions: Several psychosocial interventions, particularly those based on cognitive behavioural therapy, have been demonstrated to represent good value for money in cancer care. Future research should include a clear definition of the economic question, inclusion of all relevant costs, and consideration of utility-based quality of life measures for QALY estimation. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42014006370

    Economic evaluations of psychosocial interventions in cancer: A systematic review

    Get PDF
    Objective: Although the effectiveness of many psychosocial interventions for people with cancer has been established, one barrier to implementation in routine clinical care is a lack of data on cost-effectiveness. We conducted a systematic review to assess the cost-effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for improving psychological adjustment among people with cancer. Methods: Systematic review of the literature, study appraisal, and narrative synthesis. Results: Eight studies involving 1,668 patients were identified. Four of these reported outcomes in a cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) framework. Six studies reported psychosocial interventions to be cost-effective for improving health-related quality of life, mood, pain, distress, or fear of cancer progression, compared to usual care. Of the six psychosocial interventions identified as cost-effective, three were cognitive behavioural therapy based interventions, one was a nurse-delivered telephone follow-up plus educational group program, one was a group-based exercise and psychosocial intervention, and one was a series of 10 face-to-face or telephone-based individual support sessions delivered by a nurse. The quality of studies according to the CHEC-list criteria was good overall; however, some studies were limited by their choice of outcome measure and omission of important categories of costs. Conclusions: Several psychosocial interventions, particularly those based on cognitive behavioural therapy, have been demonstrated to represent good value for money in cancer care. Future research should include a clear definition of the economic question, inclusion of all relevant costs, and consideration of utility-based quality of life measures for QALY estimation. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42014006370

    Improving subjective perception of personal cancer risk: systematic review and meta-analysis of educational interventions for people with cancer or at high risk of cancer

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Newly diagnosed patients with cancer require education about the disease, the available treatments and potential consequences of treatment. Greater understanding of cancer risk has been found to be associated with greater health-related quality of life, improved psychological adjustment and greater health-related behaviours. The aim of this sytematic review was to assess the effectiveness of educational interventions in improving subjective cancer risk perception and to appraise the quality of the studies. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies. Eligible studies were identified via Medline, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL and Embase databases. After screening titles and abstracts, two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of 206 full-text articles. RESULTS: Forty papers were included in the review; the majority of studies were conducted among breast cancer patients (n = 29) and evaluated the effect of genetic counselling on personal perceived risk (n = 25). Pooled results from RCTs (n = 12) showed that, both in the short and long term, educational interventions did not significantly influence risk perception level (standardised mean difference 0.05, 95% CI -0.24-0.34; p = 0.74) or accuracy (odds ratio = 1.96, 95% CI: 0.61-6.25; p = 0.26). Only one RCT reported a short-term difference in risk ratings (p = 0.01). Of prospective observational studies (n = 28), many did demonstrate changes in the level of perceived risk and improved risk accuracy and risk ratings in both the short and long term. However, only one (of three) observational studies reported a short-term difference in risk ratings (p < = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Further development and investigation of educational interventions using good quality, RCTs are warranted

    What can the gut microbiome teach us about the connections between child physical and mental health? A systematic review

    Get PDF
    A deeper understanding of the gut-brain axis is of significance in pediatrics, given the influential role of early childhood experiences and exposures in shaping the microbiome, and health, across the life course. This systematic review synthesized evidence on the connection between the gut microbiome and mental health in children with physical illness. Six electronic databases were systematically searched and data extracted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Of 1,476 identified articles, 11 articles reporting on nine unique studies (all randomized controlled trials) were included. Most studies examined the gut microbiome in infants with colic, while the remaining studies investigated outcomes in children aged 1 day to 18 years at risk for atopic dermatitis or irritable bowel syndrome. Baseline and postintervention gut microbiome differences varied across studies. Findings on psychological functioning also varied, with only half of the captured studies showing a positive effect of intervention on psychological well-being. Only two studies analyzed the association between the gut microbiome and psychological outcomes, each with a different pattern of results. As the field moves forward, it will be critical to gain a better understanding of the microbiome characteristics that influence mental health outcomes in pediatric populations

    Identifying the 'Active Ingredients' of an Effective Psychological Intervention to Reduce Fear of Cancer Recurrence: A Process Evaluation

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Psychological interventions targeting fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) are effective in reducing fear and distress. Process evaluations are an important, yet scarce adjunct to published intervention trials, despite their utility in guiding the interpretation of study outcomes and optimizing intervention design for broader implementation. Accordingly, this paper reports the findings of a process evaluation conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial of a psychological intervention for melanoma patients. Methods: Men and women with a history of Stage 0–II melanoma at high-risk of developing new primary disease were recruited via High Risk Melanoma Clinics across Sydney, Australia and randomly allocated to receive the psychological intervention (n = 80) or usual care (n = 84). Intervention participants received a tailored psycho-educational resource and three individual psychotherapeutic sessions delivered via telehealth. Qualitative and quantitative data on intervention context, processes, and delivery (reach, dose, and fidelity), and mechanisms of impact (participant responses, moderators of outcome) were collected from a range of sources, including participant surveys, psychotherapeutic session audio-recordings, and clinical records. Results: Almost all participants reported using the psycho-educational resource (97%), received all intended psychotherapy sessions (96%), and reported high satisfaction with both intervention components. Over 80% of participants would recommend the intervention to others, and a small proportion (4%) found discussion of melanoma-related experiences confronting. Perceived benefits included enhanced doctor-patient communication, talking more openly with family members about melanoma, and improved coping. Of potential moderators, only higher FCR severity at baseline (pre-intervention) was associated with greater reductions in FCR severity (primary outcome) at 6-month follow-up (primary endpoint). Conclusions: Findings support the acceptability and feasibility of a psychological intervention to reduce FCR amongst individuals at high risk of developing another melanoma. Implementation into routine melanoma care is an imperative next step, with FCR screening recommended to identify those most likely to derive the greatest psychological benefit.This work was supported by a Cancer Institute NSW Translational Program Grant (GM, SWM, 05/TPG/1-01 and 10/TPG/1-02) and a Beyond Blue Project Grant (NK, 630575). NK was the recipient of a National Heart Foundation of Australia Future Leader Fellowship (101229). MD received a PhD scholarship through a Cancer Institute NSW Fellowship to AC and a Sydney Catalyst Top-Up Research Scholar Award. PB was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia Senior Principal Research Fellowship (1022582). ST received an NHMRC Postgraduate Scholarship. RM was supported by an NHMRC Investigator Grant (1194703) and University of Sydney Robinson Fellowship. AC was supported by an NHMRC Career Development Fellowship (1147843). The study protocol was reviewed and endorsed by two National Clinical Trials Groups; the Psycho-oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), and the Australian and New Zealand Melanoma Trials Group (ANZMTG/MASC)

    Skin examination behavior: the role of melanoma history, skin type, psychosocial factors, and region of residence in determining clinical and self-conducted skin examination

    Full text link
    Objective: To examine the frequency and correlates of skin examination behaviors in an international sample of individuals at varying risk of developing melanoma. Design: A cross-sectional, web-based survey. Setting: Data were collected from the general population over a 20-month period on behalf of the Melanoma Genetics Consortium (GenoMEL). Participants: A total of 8178 adults from Northern (32%), Central (33%), and Southern (14%) Europe, Australia (13%), and the United States (8%). Main outcome measures: Self-reported frequency of skin self-examination (SSE) and clinical skin examination (CSE). Results: After adjustment for age and sex, frequency of skin examination was higher in both Australia (odds ratio [OR]SSE=1.80 [99% CI, 1.49-2.18]; ORCSE=2.68 [99% CI, 2.23-3.23]) and the United States (ORSSE=2.28 [99% CI, 1.76-2.94]; ORCSE=3.39 [99% CI, 2.60-4.18]) than in the 3 European regions combined. Within Europe, participants from Southern Europe reported higher rates of SSE than those in Northern Europe (ORSSE=1.61 [99% CI, 1.31-1.97]), and frequency of CSE was higher in both Central (ORCSE=1.47 [99% CI, 1.22-1.78]) and Southern Europe (ORCSE=3.46 [99% CI, 2.78, 4.31]) than in Northern Europe. Skin examination behavior also varied according to melanoma history: participants with no history of melanoma reported the lowest levels of skin examination, while participants with a previous melanoma diagnosis reported the highest levels. After adjustment for region, and taking into account the role of age, sex, skin type, and mole count, engagement in SSE and CSE was associated with a range of psychosocial factors, including perceived risk of developing melanoma; perceived benefits of, and barriers to, skin examination; perceived confidence in one's ability to engage in screening; and social norms. In addition, among those with no history of melanoma, higher cancer-related worry was associated with greater frequency of SSE. Conclusions: Given the strong association between psychosocial factors and skin examination behaviors, particularly among people with no history of melanoma, we recommend that greater attempts be made to integrate psycho-education into the fabric of public health initiatives and clinical care, with clinicians, researchers, and advocacy groups playing a key role in guiding individuals to appropriate tools and resources

    What is the prevalence of fear of cancer recurrence in cancer survivors and patients? A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    This study was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society (KWF) grant number 10936.Objective Care for fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is considered the most common unmet need among cancer survivors. Yet the prevalence of FCR and predisposing factors remain inconclusive. To support targeted care, we provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence and severity of FCR among cancer survivors and patients, as measured using the short form of the validated Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI-SF). We also report on associations between FCR and clinical and demographic characteristics. Methods This is a systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis on the prevalence of FCR. In the review, we included all studies that used the FCRI-SF with adult (≥18 years) cancer survivors and patients. Date of search: 7 February 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Results IPD were requested from 87 unique studies and provided for 46 studies comprising 11,226 participants from 13 countries. 9311 respondents were included for the main analyses. On the FCRI-SF (range 0–36), 58.8% of respondents scored ≥13, 45.1% scored ≥16 and 19.2% scored ≥22. FCR decreased with age and women reported more FCR than men. FCR was found across cancer types and continents and for all time periods since cancer diagnosis. Conclusions FCR affects a considerable number of cancer survivors and patients. It is therefore important that healthcare providers discuss this issue with their patients and provide treatment when needed. Further research is needed to investigate how best to prevent and treat FCR and to identify other factors associated with FCR. The protocol was prospectively registered (PROSPERO CRD42020142185).Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

    Partnering With Stakeholders to Inform the Co-Design of a Psychosocial Intervention for Prenatally Diagnosed Congenital Heart Disease

    Get PDF
    Input from diverse stakeholders is critical to the process of designing healthcare interventions. This study applied a novel mixed-methods, stakeholder-engaged approach to co-design a psychosocial intervention for mothers expecting a baby with congenital heart disease (CHD) and their partners to promote family wellbeing. The research team included parents and clinicians from 8 health systems. Participants were 41 diverse parents of children with prenatally diagnosed CHD across the 8 health systems. Qualitative data were collected through online crowdsourcing and quantitative data were collected through electronic surveys to inform intervention co-design. Phases of intervention co-design were: (I) Engage stakeholders in selection of intervention goals/outcomes; (II) Engage stakeholders in selection of intervention elements; (III) Obtain stakeholder input to increase intervention uptake/utility; (IV) Obtain stakeholder input on aspects of intervention design; and (V) Obtain stakeholder input on selection of outcome measures. Parent participants anticipated the resulting intervention, HEARTPrep, would be acceptable, useful, and feasible for parents expecting a baby with CHD. This model of intervention co-design could be used for the development of healthcare interventions across chronic diseases
    • …
    corecore