Psychosocial interventions for cancer: review and analysis using a three-tiered outcomes model

Abstract

This study describes a three-tiered measurement model for psychosocial interventions with cancer patients and compares this model to extant measurement strategies. Progress has been made toward demonstrating that psychosocial interventions reduce depression, anxiety, functional impairment, and symptoms. However, Chambless and Hollon (1998) note that the literature on psychosocial interventions for cancer fails to meet criteria for establishing treatment "efficacy" and does not address issues of cost-effectiveness. The lack of a timely model of clinical outcomes may be hindering demonstration of efficacy and wider implementation of these interventions. Outcomes assessed by 65 interventions were classified as Global Health Outcomes (medical endpoints, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), or resource utilization), Dimensions of HRQOL (distress, symptoms, functional ability, or interpersonal well-being), or Mechanisms of Action (evaluation of psychological or physiological processes). A total of 28% of reviewed studies assessed Global Outcomes, 82% assessed Dimensions of HRQOL, and 49% assessed Mechanisms of Action. While most studies assessed patients' symptoms and distress, measurements of resource utilization, HRQOL, and interpersonal HRQOL were under-reported. A greater emphasis on treatment costs, quality of life, and mediating/moderating processes associated with improvement in outcomes could inform decisions regarding allocation of health-care resources and lead to more widely available and efficient interventions for patients.