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
Multicenter Study
. 2015 Oct;29(5):708-19.
doi: 10.1037/fam0000096. Epub 2015 Jul 20.

Holding back, intimacy, and psychological and relationship outcomes among couples coping with prostate cancer

Sharon L Manne  1 , David Kissane  2 , Talia Zaider  2 , Deborah Kashy  3 , David Lee  4 , Carolyn Heckman  5 , Shannon Myers Virtue  1
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Holding back, intimacy, and psychological and relationship outcomes among couples coping with prostate cancer

Sharon L Manne et al. J Fam Psychol. 2015 Oct.

Abstract

The present study evaluated intimacy as a mechanism for the effects of holding back sharing concerns about cancer on couples' psychological distress, well-being, and marital satisfaction using the actor-partner interdependence model (APIM), and evaluated 2 possible moderators of these associations: the number of patient and spouse cancer concerns. We had 139 men treated for localized prostate cancer in the past year and their spouses complete surveys about holding back sharing cancer concerns, intimacy, distress, and relationship satisfaction, as well as patient and spouse cancer concerns. APIM-indicated that the association between holding back sharing concerns, and patient and spouse distress, well-being, and relationship satisfaction could be partially accounted for by their influence on patient and spouse perceptions of relationship intimacy. The number of cancer concerns did not moderate the mediational model. Holding back has strong associations with both partners' well-being and distress. Holding back sharing concerns was particularly detrimental for couples' intimacy and relationship satisfaction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Proposed direct effect (top panel) and indirect, mediated effect (bottom panel) models of holding back, relationship intimacy, and outcomes.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mediated model of associations between holding back, intimacy, and well-being. Values in parentheses are standardized path coefficients. **p < .01.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mediated model of associations between holding back, intimacy, and relationship satisfaction. Values in parentheses are standardized path coefficients. **p < .01.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Arbuckle JL. AMOS 21.0 [Computer software] Crawfordville, FL: Amos Development; 2012.
    1. Burnett AL, Aus G, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS, D’Amico AV, Dmochowski RR the American Urological Association Prostat Cancer Guideline Update Panel. Erectile function outcome reporting after clinically localized prostate cancer treatment. The Journal of Urology. 2007;178:597–601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/jjuro.2007.03.140. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Butler EA, Egloff B, Wlhelm FH, Smith NC, Erickson EA, Gross JJ. The social consequences of expressive suppression. Emotion. 2003;3:48–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.3.l.48. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Couper J, Bloch S, Love A, Macvean M, Duchesne GM, Kissane D. Psychosocial adjustment of female partners of men with prostate cancer: A review of the literature. Psycho-Oncology. 2006;15:937–953. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.1031. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Duarte LM, Thompson JM. Sex differences in self-silencing. Psychological Reports. 1999;85:145–161. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1999.85.1.145. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms