Relationship Between Health Literacy and Social Support and the Quality of Life in Patients With Cancer: Questionnaire Study

Kobayashi, Rei; Ishizaki, Masato

doi:10.2196/17163

Cited by 24 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 55 publications

(57 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although not explicitly expressed by the professionals in our study, an overestimation of patients' HL levels could explain the struggle of professionals to convey health information to patients. Inviting family members to co-produce health and care might compensate for patients' low levels of HL [61] and improve patients' quality of life [62]. However, our findings mirror those from a study in the US Veterans' Health Administration that suggest that family members want to participate in health and care decisions with and for patients with HF but feel excluded from care teams [63].…”

Section: Individual and Relational Factors Influencing Co-productionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Improving Health for People Living With Heart Failure: Focus Group Study of Preconditions for Co-Production of Health and Care

Suutari¹,

Thor²,

Nordin³

et al. 2021

J Particip Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Co-production of health and care involving patients, families of patients, and professionals in care processes can create joint learning about how to meet patients’ needs. Although barriers and facilitators to co-production have been examined previously in various health care contexts, the preconditions in Swedish chronic cardiac care contexts are yet to be explored. This study is set in the health system of the Swedish region of Jönköping County and is part of system-wide efforts to promote better health for persons with heart failure (HF). Objective The objective of this study was to test the usefulness of the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Behavior (COM-B) model when assessing the barriers to and facilitators of co-production of health and care perceived by patients with HF, family members of patients with HF, and professionals in a Swedish chronic cardiac care context as a guide for subsequent initiatives. Methods Data collection involved 1 focus group interview (FGI) with patients with HF (n=5), 1 FGI with family members of patients with HF (n=5), 1 FGI with professionals in primary care (n=7), and 1 FGI with professionals in cardiac care (n=4). In addition, patients with HF kept diaries of their thoughts regarding co-production. Using a deductive approach to content analysis, underpinned by the COM-B model, barriers and facilitators were categorized into capabilities, opportunities, and motivations to co-produce health and care. Results The participants showed limited understanding of co-production as a practice. They appeared to view it as a privilege to be offered to patients on top of traditional care and rarely as an approach for improving health care processes. The interviews revealed the limited health literacy among patients and the struggle of professionals to convey health information to these patients. Co-production was considered to be more resource-intensive than traditional care. Different expectations of stakeholders’ roles were revealed: professionals expected older patients not to want to co-produce health and care, and all participants expected professionals to be in charge of health care services. The family members’ position involved trying to balance their desire to support their relatives with understanding when, how, and with whom to co-produce. Presumed benefits motivated stakeholders: co-production was recognized to motivate patients to improve self-care. However, the participants recognized that motivation to get involved in health and care decisions varies over time among stakeholders. Conclusions Co-production can be facilitated by the stakeholders’ motivation. However, varying levels of understanding of co-production, patients’ limited health literacy, unease with power sharing between patients and professionals, and resource constraints are barriers that need to be managed to promote co-produced care and better health for persons living with HF. Further research is warranted to explore how to co-produce health care services with patients with HF and how leaders can facilitate the inevitable cultural change it requires and represents.

show abstract

Section: Individual and Relational Factors Influencing Co-productionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Improving Health for People Living With Heart Failure: Focus Group Study of Preconditions for Co-Production of Health and Care

Suutari¹,

Thor²,

Nordin³

et al. 2021

J Particip Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study, anxiety and depression were negatively correlated with PSS, and PSS was positively correlated with quality of life, consistent with previous findings [49,50]. PSS moderates the effects of anxiety or depression on quality of life of patients.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Studies have confirmed that social support was strongly positively correlated with the physiological and psychological aspects of long-term survival of cancer [51,52]. Hence, social support is an important factor to predict the quality of life of cancer patients [50]. The key factor of social support as a stress buffer is that the individual perceives that others will provide appropriate support, which will reduce the emotional and physiological reactions of individual stress.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Interaction of anxiety, depression and hypertension on quality of life in patients with gynecological tumor and the moderating effect of social support

Gu¹,

Wu²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To explore the effect of anxiety, depression and hypertension on quality of life (QOL) of patients with gynecological tumor and the interaction among them, and the moderating effect of social support. Design: Cross-sectional design Setting: December 2019 to July 2020, the COVID-19 outbreak phase. Population or Sample: A total of 695 gynecological cancer patients were collected. Methods: The study used the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), the Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Genera tool (FACT-G), and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support Scale (MSPSS). Regression analysis and the simple slope analysis were conducted. Results: QOL of patients with anxiety and hypertension had seriously deteriorated [OR=10.297, 95%CI (5.647-18.775)]. And QOL of patients with depression and hypertension also had seriously deteriorated [OR=11.846, 95%CI (6.597-21.271)]. Calculated by crossover analysis, the synergy index, attributable proportion and relative excess risk due to interact of anxiety and hypertension were1.698,0.371 and 3.822, and the correlation index of interaction between depression and hypertension were 1.475, 0.295, and 3.493. The Social Support &Depression interaction term and Social Support &Anxiety interaction term were negatively correlated with QOL (p<0.01), and explained an extra 5.7% and 5.6% of the variance respectively (p<0.01). Conclusion: Anxiety, depression and hypertension have interaction on the QOL of patients with gynecological tumors. Social support can significantly moderate the relationship between depression, anxiety and QOL respectively. Funding: National Key R&D Program of China (Grant #2018YFC1311600). Keywords: quality of life, depression, anxiety, social support, hypertension, moderating effect

show abstract

“…In this study, anxiety and depression were negatively correlated with PSS, and PSS was positively correlated with quality of life, consistent with previous ndings [49,50]. PSS moderates the effects of anxiety or depression on quality of life of patients.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Interaction of Anxiety, Depression and Hypertension on Quality of Life in Patients With Gynecological Tumor and the Moderating Effect of Social Support

Gu¹,

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To explore the effect of anxiety, depression and hypertension on quality of life (QOL) of patients with gynecological tumor and the interaction among them, and the moderating effect of social support.Methods: The study used the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), the Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Genera tool (FACT-G), and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support Scale (MSPSS). Regression analysis and the simple slope analysis were conducted.Results: QOL of patients with anxiety and hypertension had seriously deteriorated [OR=10.297, 95%CI (5.647-18.775)]. And QOL of patients with depression and hypertension also had seriously deteriorated [OR=11.846, 95%CI (6.597-21.271)]. Calculated by crossover analysis, the synergy index, attributable proportion and relative excess risk due to interact of anxiety and hypertension were1.698,0.371 and 3.822, and the correlation index of interaction between depression and hypertension were 1.475, 0.295, and 3.493. The Social Support &Depression interaction term and Social Support &Anxiety interaction term were negatively correlated with QOL (p<0.01), and explained an extra 5.7% and 5.6% of the variance respectively (p<0.01). Conclusion: Anxiety, depression and hypertension have interaction on the QOL of patients with gynecological tumors. Social support can significantly moderate the relationship between depression, anxiety and QOL respectively.

show abstract

Relationship Between Health Literacy and Social Support and the Quality of Life in Patients With Cancer: Questionnaire Study

Cited by 24 publications

References 55 publications

Improving Health for People Living With Heart Failure: Focus Group Study of Preconditions for Co-Production of Health and Care

Improving Health for People Living With Heart Failure: Focus Group Study of Preconditions for Co-Production of Health and Care

Interaction of anxiety, depression and hypertension on quality of life in patients with gynecological tumor and the moderating effect of social support

Interaction of Anxiety, Depression and Hypertension on Quality of Life in Patients With Gynecological Tumor and the Moderating Effect of Social Support

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About