The purpose of the study was to assess a large representative sample of cancer patients on distress levels, common psychosocial problems, and awareness and use of psychosocial support services. A total of 3095 patients were assessed over a 4-week period with the Brief Symptom Inventory-18 (BSI-18), a common problems checklist, and on awareness and use of psychosocial resources. Full data was available on 2776 patients. On average, patients were 60 years old, Caucasian (78.3%), and middle class. Approximately, half were attending for follow-up care. Types of cancer varied, with the largest groups being breast (23.5%), prostate (16.9%), colorectal (7.5%), and lung (5.8%) cancer patients. Overall, 37.8% of all patients met criteria for general distress in the clinical range. A higher proportion of men met case criteria for somatisation, and more women for depression. There were no gender differences in anxiety or overall distress severity. Minority patients were more likely to be distressed, as were those with lower income, cancers other than prostate, and those currently on active treatment. Lung, pancreatic, head and neck, Hodgkin's disease, and brain cancer patients were the most distressed. Almost half of all patients who met distress criteria had not sought professional psychosocial support nor did they intend to in the future. In conclusion, distress is very common in cancer patients across diagnoses and across the disease trajectory. Many patients who report high levels of distress are not taking advantage of available supportive resources. Barriers to such use, and factors predicting distress and use of psychosocial care, require further exploration.
Lung cancer patients report the highest distress levels of all cancer groups. In addition to poor prognosis, the self-blame and stigma associated with smoking might partially account for that distress and prevent patients from requesting help and communicating with their partners. The present study used innovative methods to investigate potential links of shame and guilt in lung cancer recovery with distress and marital adjustment. A specific emphasis was an examination of the impact of shame on partner communication. Lung cancer patients (n = 8) and their partners (n = 8) completed questionnaires and interviews that were videotaped. We report descriptive statistics and Spearman correlations between shame and guilt, relationship talk, marital satisfaction, distress, and smoking status. We coded the interviews for nonverbal expressions of shame. Greater self-reported shame was associated with decreased relationship-talk frequency and marital satisfaction, and with increased depression and smoking behaviour. Nonverbal shame behaviour also correlated with higher depression and increased smoking behaviour. Guilt results were more mixed. More recent smoking behaviour also correlated with higher depression. At a time when lung cancer patients often do not request help for distress, possibly because of shame, our preliminary study suggests that shame can also disrupt important partner relationships and might prevent patients from disclosing to physicians their need for psychosocial intervention and might increase their social isolation. Even if patients cannot verbally disclose their distress, nonverbal cues could potentially give clinicians an opportunity to intervene.
Few, scalable, evidence-based psychosocial interventions exist for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors (AYAs, 18–39 years old). Using an existing, facilitated, online synchronous chat group-plus-education model (OSG+E), we replaced their educational workbook with an AYA-created film to stimulate an age-specific, emotion-focused group discussion (OSG+V). This randomized proof-of-concept trial compared the two models' content suitability, group processes, and feasibility over 9 months in 34 male and female AYAs with a range of cancers. AYAs rated the OSG + V model more suitable, cohesive, and as having higher levels of important group processes than the OSG+E. A larger randomized trial is feasible for this AYA-appropriate, emotion-focused OSG + V model.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.