Inter-professional, psycho-social intervention to facilitate resilience and reduce supportive care needs for patients with cancer: Results of a non-comparative, randomized phase II trial.

Related Articles

Inter-professional, psycho-social intervention to facilitate resilience and reduce supportive care needs for patients with cancer: Results of a non-comparative, randomized phase II trial.

Psychooncology. 2018 Apr 14;:

Authors: Eicher M, Ribi K, Senn-Dubey C, Senn S, Ballabeni P, Betticher D

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We developed two intensity levels of a complex intervention for inter-professional supportive care in cancer (IPSC-C) to facilitate resilience and reduce unmet supportive care needs. We aimed to test the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of both intensity levels in routine practice.
METHODS: In a randomized, non-comparative phase II trial, newly diagnosed patients received either low (LI-IPSC-C) or high (HI-IPSC-C) intensity interventions. LI-IPSC-C consisted of three electronic assessments of resilience, unmet supportive care needs, mood and coping effort over 16 weeks with an immediate feedback to clinicians including tailored intervention recommendations to facilitate resilience and supportive care. HI-IPSC-C added five structured consultations (face-to-face and telephone) provided by specialized nurses. Primary outcome was a change ≥ 5 in resilience score on the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Secondary outcomes were unmet supportive care needs, mood and coping effort. We assessed feasibility by clinician-provided tailored interventions as recommended and acceptability through qualitative interviews with clinicians and patients.
RESULTS: In the LI-IPSC-C arm 11/41, in the HI-IPSC-C arm 17/43 patients increased resilience scores by ≥ 5. Relatively more patients decreased unmet needs in HI-IPSC-C arm. Mood, in both arms, and coping effort, in HI-IPSC-C arm, improved meaningfully. Feasibility was limited for the LI-IPSC-C arm, mainly due to lack of time, acceptability was high in both arms.
CONCLUSION: Neither LI-IPSC-C nor HI-IPSC-C interventions reached the desired threshold. HI-IPSC-C showed positive effects on secondary outcomes and was feasible. Resilience as measured by the CD-RISC may not be the optimal outcome measure for this intervention.

PMID: 29655277 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Loading...