Cognitive behavioral therapy and physical exercise for climacteric symptoms in breast cancer patients experiencing treatment-induced menopause: design of a multicenter trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Premature menopause is a major concern of younger women undergoing adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Hormone replacement therapy is contraindicated in women with a history of breast cancer. Non-hormonal medications show a range of bothersome side-effects. There is growing evidence that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and physical exercise can have a positive impact on symptoms in naturally occurring menopause. The objective of this study is to investigate the efficacy of these interventions among women with breast cancer experiencing treatment-induced menopause.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>In a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial, we are evaluating the effectiveness of CBT/relaxation, of physical exercise and of these two program elements combined, in reducing menopausal symptoms, improving sexual functioning, reducing emotional distress, and in improving the health-related quality of life of younger breast cancer patients who experience treatment-induced menopause. 325 breast cancer patients (aged < 50) are being recruited from hospitals in the Amsterdam region, and randomly allocated to one of the three treatment groups or a 'waiting list' control group. Self-administered questionnaires are completed by the patients at baseline, and at 12 weeks (T1) and 6 months (T2) post-study entry. Upon completion of the study, women assigned to the control group will be given the choice of undergoing either the CBT or physical exercise program.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Cognitive behavioral therapy and physical exercise are potentially useful treatments among women with breast cancer undergoing treatment-induced, premature menopause. For these patients, hormonal and non-hormonal therapies are contraindicated or have a range of bothersome side-effects. Hence, research into these interventions is needed, before dissemination and implementation in the current health care system can take place.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR1165) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00582244).</p

Advantages and disadvantages of an objective selection process for early intervention in employees at risk for sickness absence

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It is unclear if objective selection of employees, for an intervention to prevent sickness absence, is more effective than subjective 'personal enlistment'. We hypothesize that objectively selected employees are 'at risk' for sickness absence and eligible to participate in the intervention program.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The dispatch of 8603 screening instruments forms the starting point of the objective selection process. Different stages of this process, throughout which employees either dropped out or were excluded, were described and compared with the subjective selection process. Characteristics of ineligible and ultimately selected employees, for a randomized trial, were described and quantified using sickness absence data.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall response rate on the screening instrument was 42.0%. Response bias was found for the parameters sex and age, but not for sickness absence. Sickness absence was higher in the 'at risk' (N = 212) group (42%) compared to the 'not at risk' (N = 2503) group (25%) (OR 2.17 CI 1.63–2.89; p = 0.000). The selection process ended with the successful inclusion of 151 eligible, i.e. 2% of the approached employees in the trial.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The study shows that objective selection of employees for early intervention is effective. Despite methodological and practical problems, selected employees are actually those at risk for sickness absence, who will probably benefit more from the intervention program than others.</p

GP involvement after a cancer diagnosis; patients' call to improve decision support

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is considered important to realise personalised cancer care. Increased GP involvement after a diagnosis is advocated to improve SDM. AIM: To explore whether patients with cancer are in need of GP involvement in cancer care in general and in SDM, and whether GP involvement occurs. DESIGN & SETTING: An online national survey was distributed by the Dutch Federation of Cancer Patient Organisations (NFK) in May 2019. METHOD: The survey was sent to (former) patients with cancer. Topics included GP involvement in cancer care in general and in SDM. Descriptive statistics and quotes were used. RESULTS: Among 4763 (former) patients with cancer, 59% (n = 2804) expressed a need for GP involvement in cancer care. Of these patients, 79% (n = 2193) experienced GP involvement. Regarding GP involvement in SDM, 82% of patients (n = 3724) expressed that the GP should 'listen to patients' worries and considerations', 69% (n = 3130) to 'check patients' understanding of information', 66% (n = 3006) to 'discuss patients' priorities in life and the consequences of treatment options for these priorities', and 67% (n = 3045) to 'create awareness of the patient's role in the decision making'. This happened in 47%, 17%, 15% and 10% of these patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: The majority of (former) patients with cancer expressed a need for active GP involvement in cancer care. GP support in the fundamental SDM steps is presently insufficient. Therefore, GPs should be made aware of these needs and enabled to support their patients with cancer in SDM