Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
The association of cognitive coping style with patient preferences in a patient-led follow-up study among colorectal cancer survivors.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Voigt Kelly R, Wullaert Lissa, van Driel M H Elise, Goudberg Max, Doornebosch Pascal G, Schreinemakers Jennifer M J, Verseveld Maria, Peeters Koen C M J, Verhoef Cornelis, Husson Olga, Grünhagen Dirk J
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Amidst the rising number of cancer survivors and personnel shortages, optimisation of follow-up strategies is imperative, especially since intensive follow-up does not lead to survival benefits. Understanding patient preferences and identifying the associated patient profiles is crucial. Coping style may be a key determinant in achieving this. Our study aims to evaluate preferences, identify coping styles and their associated factors, and explore the association between coping style and patients' preferences in colorectal cancer (CRC) follow-up.
METHODS: In a prospective multicentre implementation study, patients completed the Threatening Medical Situations Inventory (TMSI) to determine their coping style. Simultaneously patients choose their follow-up preferences for the CRC trajectory regarding frequency of tumour marker determination, location of blood sampling, and manner of contact.
RESULTS: A total of 188 patients completed the TMSI questionnaire after inclusion. A more intensive follow-up was preferred by 71.5% of patients. Of all patients, 52.0% had a coping style classified as 'blunting' and 34.0% as 'monitoring'. Variables such as a younger age, female gender, higher educational level, and lower ASA scores were associated with having higher monitoring scores. However, there were no significant associations between follow-up preferences and patients' coping styles.
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that none of the provided options in a patient-led follow-up are unsuitable for patients who underwent curative surgery for primary CRC, based on coping style determined at baseline. Low-intensity surveillance after curative resection of CRC may, therefore, be suitable for a wide range of patients independent of coping styles.
METHODS: In a prospective multicentre implementation study, patients completed the Threatening Medical Situations Inventory (TMSI) to determine their coping style. Simultaneously patients choose their follow-up preferences for the CRC trajectory regarding frequency of tumour marker determination, location of blood sampling, and manner of contact.
RESULTS: A total of 188 patients completed the TMSI questionnaire after inclusion. A more intensive follow-up was preferred by 71.5% of patients. Of all patients, 52.0% had a coping style classified as 'blunting' and 34.0% as 'monitoring'. Variables such as a younger age, female gender, higher educational level, and lower ASA scores were associated with having higher monitoring scores. However, there were no significant associations between follow-up preferences and patients' coping styles.
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that none of the provided options in a patient-led follow-up are unsuitable for patients who underwent curative surgery for primary CRC, based on coping style determined at baseline. Low-intensity surveillance after curative resection of CRC may, therefore, be suitable for a wide range of patients independent of coping styles.