Lambert Sylvie D, McElduff Patrick, Girgis Afaf, Levesque Janelle V, Regan Tim W, Turner Jane, Candler Hayley, Mihalopoulos Cathrine, Shih Sophy T F, Kayser Karen, Chong Peter
Ingram School of Nursing, McGill University, Wilson Hall, 3506 University Street, Montreal, QC, H3A 2A7, Canada.
Psycho-Oncology Research Group, Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, UNSW Medicine, The University of New South Wales, Locked Bag 7103, Liverpool, NSW, 1871, Australia.
Support Care Cancer. 2016 Feb;24(2):711-722. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2833-3. Epub 2015 Jul 17.
To examine the acceptability of the methods used to evaluate Coping-Together, one of the first self-directed coping skill intervention for couples facing cancer, and to collect preliminary efficacy data.
Forty-two couples, randomized to a minimal ethical care (MEC) condition or to Coping-Together, completed a survey at baseline and 2 months after, a cost diary, and a process evaluation phone interview.
One hundred seventy patients were referred to the study. However, 57 couples did not meet all eligibility criteria, and 51 refused study participation. On average, two to three couples were randomized per month, and on average it took 26 days to enrol a couple in the study. Two couples withdrew from MEC, none from Coping-Together. Only 44 % of the cost diaries were completed, and 55 % of patients and 60 % of partners found the surveys too long, and this despite the follow-up survey being five pages shorter than the baseline one. Trends in favor of Coping-Together were noted for both patients and their partners.
This study identified the challenges of conducting dyadic research, and a number of suggestions were put forward for future studies, including to question whether distress screening was necessary and what kind of control group might be more appropriate in future studies.
考察用于评估“共同应对”(Coping-Together)的方法的可接受性,“共同应对”是针对患癌夫妇的首批自我导向应对技能干预措施之一,并收集初步疗效数据。
42对夫妇被随机分配到最低限度伦理关怀(MEC)组或“共同应对”组,在基线时和2个月后完成一项调查、一份成本日记以及一次过程评估电话访谈。
170名患者被转介到该研究。然而,57对夫妇不符合所有入选标准,51对拒绝参与研究。平均每月有两到三对夫妇被随机分组,平均每招募一对夫妇需要26天。有两对夫妇退出了MEC组,“共同应对”组无退出者。只有44%的成本日记被完成,55%的患者和60%的伴侣认为调查问卷过长,尽管随访调查问卷比基线调查问卷少了五页。在患者及其伴侣中都发现了有利于“共同应对”组的趋势。
本研究确定了进行二元研究的挑战,并为未来研究提出了一些建议,包括质疑是否有必要进行痛苦筛查以及未来研究中哪种对照组可能更合适。