Rahimi 2021a.
| Study characteristics | |
| Methods |
Study design: cluster‐RCT Duration of study: the study was conducted from November 2018 to April 2019. Country: Iran Income classification: upper‐middle income country in 2018‐2019 Geographical scope: Mashhad, Iran Healthcare setting: home (telecommunication by using telephone and virtual social networks) |
| Participants | 1. Age: intervention and control groups in the mean of age (51.1 ± 8.4 vs 48.5 ± 8.3 years, respectively) 2. Gender: both 3. Socioeconomic background: for control group, 53.4% sufficient income; for intervention group, 60% less than adequate income 4. Educational background: in both groups, most of the patients had nonacademic education. Inclusion criteria: a. willingness to participate, providing written informed consent for participation; b. age at least 18 years; c. having colorectal cancer based on cytological diagnostic findings and confirmed by an oncologist (based on patient files); d. having minimum literacy, auditory and visual health; e. willingness to share their telephone number for calls and the ability to use smartphones. Exclusion criteria: a. unwillingness to continue participation; b. returning incomplete questionnaires; c. not completing the intervention course for any reasons or attention for < 75% of the determined amount; d. not establishing successful telephone and Internet calls; e. having unstable clinical conditions during the research period, e.g. haemodynamic changes, reduced consciousness level, or the occurrence of fistulas. Note: at baseline, the intervention and control group scores for Warwick‐Edinburgh Subjective Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS)—Subjective well‐being were, respectively, 27.8 (5.4) and 27.6 (6.3). Stated purpose: to evaluate the impact of peer support through telecommunications on the subjective well‐being of colorectal cancer patients |
| Interventions |
Name: peer support programme with telecommunication Title/name of PW and number: 4 (2 men and 2 women) patients (peer counsellors) 1. Selection: previously mentioned criteria for selecting patients, in addition to scoring at least 40 on the WEMWBS and successfully passing the stages of treatment 2. Educational background: having minimum literacy (see inclusion criteria) 3. Training: a workshop session (120 min) was held for familiarizing the volunteers in the peer group with the research. Peer volunteers received explanations on the objectives of the study. They also acquired knowledge and skills for providing their experimental knowledge to the intervention group. In this workshop, the peers were familiarized with subjective well‐being, ways to establish supportive and strong relationships, and subjective well‐being improvement strategies. Training was provided by a psychologist. 4. Supervision: not specified 5. Incentives/remuneration: not specified Prevention type: selective—participants were included based upon the presence of a risk factor (cancer patients); the WEMWBS scores at baseline are not indicative of low mental health. Intervention details: the intervention group received the support programme (for emotional, information, and evaluation dimensions) by the peers. The peer support programme met two times a week by phone and three times a week using virtual social networks (based on patients’ preferences). Control: usual care (routine nursing care programme) |
| Outcomes |
Participants’outcomes of interest for this review
Carers’ outcomes of interest for this review Nil Economic outcomes Nil Time points: baseline, post‐intervention (< 1 month) |
| Notes |
Source of funding: Deputy for Research Notes on validation of instruments (screening and outcomes): in the present study, the reliability of the instrument (WEMWBS) was determined using internal and external reliability methods. For this purpose, a questionnaire was given to 30 patients. Values of Cronbach’s alpha for optimism construct, energetic structure, and positive relationship with others structure were 0.783, 0.741, and 0.748, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha had high internal reliability (α = 0.875). Also, the reliability of the test‐retest in two weeks was confirmed for the whole questionnaire (r = 0.81). Additional information: none Handling the data: not applicable Prospective trial registration number: IRCT20190123042480N1 |