Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Jan 1;121(1):150-8.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.29009. Epub 2014 Sep 10.

Dyadic psychosocial intervention for advanced lung cancer patients and their family caregivers: results of a randomized pilot trial

Hoda Badr  1 , Cardinale B Smith, Nathan E Goldstein, Jorge E Gomez, William H Redd
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Dyadic psychosocial intervention for advanced lung cancer patients and their family caregivers: results of a randomized pilot trial

Hoda Badr et al. Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: Advanced lung cancer (LC) patients and their families have reported low self-efficacy for self-care/caregiving and high rates of distress, yet few programs exist to address their supportive care needs during treatment. This pilot study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a 6-session, telephone-based dyadic psychosocial intervention that was developed for advanced LC patients and their caregivers. The program was grounded in self-determination theory (SDT), which emphasizes the importance of competence (self-efficacy), autonomy (sense of choice/volition), and relatedness (sense of belonging/connection) for psychological functioning. The primary outcomes were patient and caregiver psychological functioning (depression/anxiety) and caregiver burden. The secondary outcomes were the SDT constructs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness.

Methods: Thirty-nine advanced LC patients who were within 1 month of treatment initiation (baseline) and their caregivers (51% spouses/partners) completed surveys and were randomized to the intervention or usual medical care. Eight weeks after baseline, they completed follow-up surveys.

Results: Solid recruitment (60%) and low attrition rates demonstrated feasibility. Strong program evaluations (mean, 8.6/10) and homework completion rates (88%) supported acceptability. Participants receiving the intervention evidenced significant improvements (P < .0001) in depression, anxiety, and caregiver burden in comparison with usual medical care. Large effect sizes (d ≥ 1.2) favoring the intervention were also found for patient and caregiver competence and relatedness and for caregiver autonomous motivation for providing care.

Conclusion: These findings support intervention feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy. By empowering families with the skills to coordinate care and meet the challenges of LC together, this intervention holds great promise for improving palliative/supportive care services in cancer.

Keywords: caregivers; couples; lung cancer; palliative care; psychological distress; psychosocial intervention; supportive care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2014.
    1. Mountain CF. Revisions in the international system for staging lung cancer. Chest. 1997;111:1710–1717. - PubMed
    1. Alberti W, Anderson G, Bartolucci A, et al. Chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis using updated data on individual patients from 52 randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 1995;311:899–909. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Degner LF, Sloan JA. Symptom distress in newly diagnosed ambulatory cancer patients and as a predictor of survival in lung cancer. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 1995;10:423–431. - PubMed
    1. Zabora J, Brintzenhofeszoc K, Curbow B, Hooker C, Piantadosi S. The prevalence of psychological distress by cancer site. Psycho-Oncology. 2001;10:19–28. - PubMed

Publication types