Effects of psychosocial interventions on quality of life in adult cancer patients: meta analysis of 37 published controlled outcome studies
Introduction
There is considerable evidence suggesting that cancer patients suffer from substantial and long-term psychological distress associated with different forms of cancer and its medical treatment [1]. The psychosocial management of adjustment problems experienced by people with cancer seems to be an obvious requirement for a more effective treatment of the disease. Nevertheless, there is an ongoing debate about whether and to what extent psychooncological care can be effective in patients suffering from cancer. These questions were comprehensively addressed by narrative reviews in several previous investigations [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9].
However, there are only a few studies that examined the overall effectiveness of psychosocial interventions quantitatively by means of meta analysis [10], [11], [12]. The small number of quantitative meta analyses might be due to the fact that the single intervention studies are difficult to compare. Differences in clinical characteristics and methodological design can easily obscure the investigated effects of psychosocial interventions on outcome measures. Potential confounding variables are for example, (1) the patients’ clinical and demographic characteristics such as type of diagnosis, stage and course of the disease, medical treatment, age, gender, and educational level; (2) type and duration of psychosocial interventions; (3) selection and operationalization of outcome measures used to assess the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions; and (4) the methodological quality of intervention studies indicated by the choice of control groups, randomization status of treatment conditions, or documentation of experimental and statistical designs and procedures. Meta analyses can quantify the impact of such possible moderating variables in terms of correlational relationships, although causal explanations of these relationships cannot be provided.
The present meta analysis tried to reduce the problem of different outcome measures by restricting relevant criteria to subjective quality of life (QoL) excluding other outcome criteria such as psychiatric syndromes (fear, depression), survival time, relapse rate or side effects of medical treatment. QoL was chosen because of the clinical relevance of this concept [13], its multidimensional structure reflecting the impact of cancer on several areas of the patients’ life [14], and its sensitivity to psychotherapeutically induced effects [2], [6], [9]. However, QoL is no well-defined homogeneous concept so that a possible significant impact of the different conceptualizations of QoL on outcome measurement should be controlled.
The present meta analysis sought to address the following issues: (1) What is the overall effect size of psychosocial interventions on QoL in adult cancer patients? (2) Do various types of psychosocial interventions create different effects? (3) Does effect size vary as a function of duration of psychosocial intervention? (4) Do sociodemographic and clinical parameters moderate these effects? (5) Do different conceptualizations of QoL reveal a significant impact on the effect size? (6) Does the methodological quality of intervention studies modify the effect size?
Section snippets
Method
Following common practice the present meta analysis consisted of six phases [15]: (1) formulation of research hypotheses; (2) extensive literature review according to research hypotheses; (3) identifying and coding of conceptually and methodologically relevant aspects of each single study; (4) quantitative aggregation of single effect sizes; (5) interpretation; and (6) documentation of results.
Results
The overall average effect size was (N=3120 cancer patients) with a 95% confidence interval defined by −0.13≤0.31≤0.75. The effect sizes of each study are presented as a stem-and-leaf display in Table 1. The residual standard deviation of the single effect sizes was . Thus, both criteria indicated that the observed overall effect size must be handled cautiously when generalized to a population effect size. The effect size of 0.31 was equivalent to a standardized mean difference
Discussion and conclusion
Results clearly confirmed the overall hypothesis that psychosocial interventions reveal a positive impact on QoL in adult cancer patients. The observed effect size of (d=0.65) was slightly higher than those reported in previous meta analyses [10], [11]. This might be partly due to the application of the meta analysis model proposed by Hunter and Schmidt [65], whereas in previous studies the model of Hedges and Olkin [66] was preferred. The former one explicitly considered different
References (77)
- et al.
The quality of life of cancer patients: a review of the literature
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1985) - et al.
Randomised controlled study of relaxation training
Eur. J. Cancer
(1991) - et al.
The impact of a psychological intervention on quality of life in non-metastatic breast cancer
Eur. J. Cancer
(1996) The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results
Psychol. Bull.
(1979)- et al.
A randomized trial of group psychoeducational therapy for cancer patients
Patient Edu. Counsel.
(1989) - Spijker van’t A, Trijsburg RW, Duivenvoorden HJ. Psychological sequelae of cancer diagnosis: a meta analytical review...
Psychological interventions for cancer patients to enhance the quality of life
J. Consult Clin. Psychol.
(1992)Review: where are we now? Evaluating two decades of group interventions with adult cancer patients
J. Psychiatry Mental Health Nurs.
(1997)- Cunningham AJ. From neglect to support to coping: the evolution of psychosocial interventions for cancer patients. In:...
- et al.
Psychological concomitants of cancer: current state of research
Psychol. Med.
(1982)
Aspects of psychological intervention with breast cancer patients
Ir. J. Psychol. Med.
Effects of psychological treatment on cancer patients: a critical review
Psychosom. Med.
Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: a meta analysis of randomized experiments
Health Psychol.
The effect of psychological interventions on anxiety and depression in cancer patients: results of two meta analyses
Br. J. Cancer
Measuring quality of life: apparent benefits, potential concerns
Can. J. Oncol.
Group psychological therapy for cancer patients
Support Care Cancer
Evaluation by multidimensional instruments of health-related quality of life of elderly cancer patients undergoing three different “psychosocial” treatment approaches
Support Care Cancer
Measuring the quality of life in cancer patients: The Functional Living Index—Cancer. Development and validation
J. Clin. Oncol.
Effects of cognitive-behavioral strategies on pain in cancer patients
Cancer Nurs.
Starting again—a comparison of a group rehabilitation program for cancer patients
Acta Oncol.
A randomized study of an rehabilitation program for cancer patients: the “starting again” group
Psychooncology
A pilot study of cognitive behavioral therapy and social support group interventions with newly diagnosed cancer patients
J. Psychosoc Oncol.
Relaxation and imagery in the treatment of breast cancer
Br. Med. J.
Preparing patients for cancer chemotherapy: effect of coping preparation and relaxation interventions
J. Consult Clin. Psychol.
Psychosocial benefits of a cancer support group
Cancer
Psychosocial rehabilitation of gynaecologic oncology patients
Arch. Phys. Med. Rehab.
Relaxation therapy as an adjunct in radiation oncology
J. Clin. Psychol.
Cited by (395)
Cardiovascular health-related quality of life in cancer: a prospective study comparing the ESC HeartQoL and EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire
2023, European Journal of Heart Failure
- 1
References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta analysis.