Skip to main content
PMC home page
British Journal of Cancer logoLink to British Journal of Cancer
. 2004 Aug 17;91(6):1050–1062. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602103

Psychosocial interventions for patients with advanced cancer – a systematic review of the literature

R J Uitterhoeve 1,*, M Vernooy 2, M Litjens 1, K Potting 1, J Bensing 3, P De Mulder 4, T van Achterberg 5
PMCID: PMC2747689  PMID: 15316564

Abstract

Advanced cancer is associated with emotional distress, especially depression and feelings of sadness. To date, it is unclear which is the most effective way to address these problems. This review focuses on the effects of psychosocial interventions on the quality of life (QoL) of patients with advanced cancer. It was hypothesised that patients will benefit from psychosocial interventions by improving QoL, especially in the domain of emotional functioning. The review was conducted using systematic review methodology involving a systematic search of the literature published between 1990 and 2002, quality assessment of included studies, systematic data extraction and narrative data synthesis. In all, 10 randomised controlled studies involving 13 trials were included. Overall interventions and outcome measures across studies were heterogeneous. Outcome measures, pertaining to the QoL dimension of emotional functioning, were most frequently measured. A total of 12 trials evaluating behaviour therapy found positive effects on one or more indicators of QoL, for example, depression. The results of the review support recommendation of behaviour therapy in the care of patients with advanced cancer.

Keywords: advanced cancer, palliative care, systematic review, psychosocial interventions, behaviour therapy, quality of life

In 1998, approximately 60 000 new cancer patients were diagnosed in the Netherlands (Visser et al, 2002). In that same year, 37 000 patients died of this disease (Visser et al, 2002). About half of all patients cannot be cured and receive treatment with a palliative intent.

Clearly, the emotional impact of a cancer diagnosis is devastating and characterised by shock, disbelief, anger, anxiety, depression and difficulty in performing activities of daily living. A similar response occurs at each transitional point of the disease, that is, beginning treatment, recurrence, treatment failure and disease progression (Pasacreta and Pickett, 1998). Although it is obvious that many patients with cancer experience emotional distress, van't Spijker et al (1997) found that percentages for depression varied from 0 to 46%, for anxiety from 0.9 to 49% and for general psychological distress from 5 to 50%. These data do not refer to patients in a specific stage of cancer, which may account for the wide variation in prevalence rates. Less variation in prevalence rates of emotional distress is found in patients with advanced disease. In this population, emotional distress and depression, in particular, appear to be a common problem (Zabora et al, 1997; Massie and Popkin, 1998). Hotopf et al (2002) estimated that the prevalence of depression ranged from 15% for major depression to at least 30% for all depressive disorders (including minor depression).

Moreover, several studies (Slevin et al, 1996; Sanson-Fisher et al, 2000; Soothill et al, 2001) report that patients in an advanced stage of the disease have high levels of psychosocial needs that are not properly met. Professional caregivers appear to be selective in their receptiveness of patients' needs, focus on physical problems and to a much lesser extent on emotional problems and psychosocial needs. This implies that psychological problems and emotional needs are not adequately assessed (Heaven and Maguire, 1997; Sanson-Fisher et al, 2000; Fallowfield et al, 2001) and consequently addressed (Wilkinson, 1991; Dennison, 1995; Ford et al, 1996; Maguire et al, 1996; Heaven and Maguire, 1997; Suchman et al, 1997; Maguire, 1999; Osse et al, 2000; Andersen and Adamsen, 2001; Uitterhoeve et al, 2003).

In the last decade, several systematic reviews (Trijsburg et al, 1992; Devine and Westlake, 1995; Meyer and Mark, 1995; Sheard and Maguire, 1999; Barsevick et al, 2002; Newell et al, 2002) were published about the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for a general population of patients with cancer. Each review had somewhat different objectives, for example, outcomes of interest between reviews ranged from all possible psychosocial outcomes to survival and immune outcomes. Similarly, each review employed different inclusion criteria and controlled for study quality in different ways. Despite these differences, overall it appears that psychosocial interventions to some extent may help patients with cancer. Especially, patients identified as either suffering from or being at high risk for psychological distress seem to benefit (Sheard and Maguire, 1999). None of the mentioned reviews (Trijsburg et al, 1992; Devine and Westlake, 1995; Meyer and Mark, 1995; Sheard and Maguire, 1999; Newell et al, 2002; Barsevick et al, 2002), however, explicitly focused on the effects of psychosocial interventions in patients with cancer in an advanced stage of the disease.

Hence, a systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions in patients with advanced cancer is conducted. It is hypothesised that patients with advanced cancer will benefit from psychosocial interventions by improving quality of life (QoL), especially in the domain of emotional functioning. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and examine all known controlled studies published between 1990 and 2002 pertaining to the efficacy of psychosocial interventions on the QoL of adult cancer patients in an advanced stage of the disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Search strategy

First, computerised databases of Medline (1989–2002), PsycInfo (1988–2002) and Cinahl (1982–2002) were searched using the following procedure. Subject-specific keywords used to describe patients and interventions relevant to this review were selected by using the thesaurus function of the databases. The selected subject-specific keywords for patients and psychosocial interventions were separately combined (using Boolean operator ‘OR’) with relevant free text words. The two searches were then combined (using Boolean operator ‘AND’) to limit the search to studies with cancer patients in an advanced stage of the disease, which mention psychosocial or any of the approximate synonyms for psychosocial interventions. Next, the above combined search was then, respectively, combined (using Boolean operator ‘AND’) with a database specific methodological filter adapted from Robinson and Dickersin (2002) limiting the search to controlled studies. The search was then limited to papers published between 1990 and 2002 (Table 1). Second, abstracts of references of all relevant papers were retrieved and checked to identify additional studies. Third, to identify additional relevant studies the Science Citation Index was used to search for studies that have cited located, relevant papers. Fourth, leaders in the field were contacted to locate relevant but currently unpublished studies or suggest others who possibly know of unpublished work.

Table 1. Search strategy.

Medline (1990–2002) Cinahl (1990–2002) PsycInfo (1990–2002)
((((‘Neoplasms-’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (cancer* in ab) or (tumor* in ab) or (tumour* in ab) or (malign* in ab) or (oncolog* in ab)) and ((‘Palliative-Care’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (‘Terminal-Care’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (‘Hospice-Care’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (‘Terminally-Ill’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (incurable in ab) or (incurable in ti) or (advanced in ab) or (advanced in ti) or (palliat* in ab) or (palliat* in ti) or (terminal* in ab) or (terminal* in ti))) and ((explode ‘Psychotherapy-’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (‘Patient-Education’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (‘Cognitive-Therapy’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (explode ‘Behavior-Therapy’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (explode ‘Adaptation-Psychological’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (‘Counseling-’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (‘Social-Support’/all subheadings in MIME,MJME) or (psychosocial in ab) or (psychosocial in ti))) and (((Randomized-Controlled-Trial in pt) or (Controlled-Clinical-Trial in pt) or (randomized controlled trials in MIME,MJME) or (random allocation in MIME,MJME) or (double-blind method in MIME,MJME) or (single-blind method in MIME,MJME) or (Clinical-Trial in pt) or (clinical trials in MIME,MJME) or (‘clinical trial’) or ((singl* or doubl* or trebl* or tripl*) and (mask* or blind*)) or (‘latin square’) or (placebos in MIME,MJME) or placebo* or random* or (research design in MIME,MJME) or (comparative study in MIME,MJME) or (evaluation studies in MIME,MJME) or (follow-up studies in MIME,MJME) or (prospective studies in MIME,MJME) or (cross-over studies in MIME,MJME) or control* or prospective* or volunteer*) not ((animal in MIME,MJME) not (human in MIME,MJME))) (((‘Neoplasms-’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (cancer in ab) or (tumor* in ab) or (tumour* in ab) or (malign* in ab) or (oncolog* in ab)) and ((explode ‘Terminal-Care’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (‘Terminally-Ill-Patients’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (incurable in ab) or (incurable in ti) or (advanced in ab) or (advanced in ti) or (palliat* in ab) or (palliat* in ti) or (terminal* in ab) or (terminal* in ti)))) and (((explode ‘Psychotherapy-’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (explode ‘Behavior-Therapy’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (‘Coping-’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or ((‘Caregiver-Support’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (‘Support-Groups’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE)) or (‘Social-Networks’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (explode ‘Counseling-’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (‘Death-Education’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (‘Patient-Education’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (psychosocial in ab) or (psychosocial in ti)) and ((Clinical-Trial in DT) or (clinical-trials in DE) or (double-blind-studies in DE) or (single-blind-studies in DE) or (triple-blind-studies in DE) or ((singl* or doubl* or trebl* or tripl*) and (mask* or blind*)) or (‘latin square’) or (placebo in DE) or placebo* or random* or (study design in DE) or (explode ‘quasi experimental studies’/all topical subheadings/all age subheadings in DE) or (pretest posttest control group design in DE) or (solomon four group design in DE) or (crossover design in DE) or (repeated measures in DE) or (pretest posttest design in DE) or (experimental studies in DE) or control* or prospective* or volunteer* or compar*) ((((‘Neoplasms-’ in DE) or (cancer in ab) or (tumor* in ab) or (tumour* in ab) or (malign* in ab) or (oncolog* in ab)) and ((‘Palliative-Care’ in DE) or ((‘Terminal-Cancer’ in DE) or (‘Terminally-Ill-Patients’ in DE)) or (‘Hospice-’ in DE) or (incurable in ab) or (incurable in ti) or (advanced in ab) or (advanced in ti) or (palliat* in ab) or (palliat* in ti) or (terminal* in ab) or (terminal* in ti))) and ((‘Coping-Behavior’ in DE) or (‘Support –Groups’ in DE) or (‘Social-Support-Networks’ in DE) or (explode ‘Psychotherapy –’ in DE) or (‘Cognitive-Therapy’ in DE) or (‘Art-Therapy’ in DE) or (‘Counseling-’ in DE) or (‘Self-Management’ in DE) or (‘Client-Education’ in DE) or (psychosocial in ab) or (psychosocial in ti))) and ((experimental design in DE) or (Clinical-Trial in pt) or (clinical trial) or ((singl* or doubl* or trebl* or tripl*) and (mask* or blind*)) or (‘latin square’) or (placebo in DE) or placebo* or random* or (follow-up studies in DE) or (prospective studies in DE) or (repeated-measures in DE) or (Treatment-Outcome-Study in pt) or (treatment effectiveness evaluation in DE) or control* or prospective* or volunteer* or compar*)
Hits 328 Hits 179 Hits 77
Open in a new tab

Inclusion criteria

Retrieved studies were independently assessed for inclusion by two reviewers (RU and KP) and included if all of the inclusion criteria were met. Inclusion and exclusion criteria are summarised in Table 2. Disagreement over inclusion between the reviewers was resolved through discussion. When no consensus could be achieved, a third researcher (TvA) decided.

Table 2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Inclusion criteria:
A controlled study with a psychosocial intervention in at least one arm of the study
A study population of adult patients (⩾18 years of age) with cancer in an advanced stage of the disease (stage IV)
One (or more) dimension(s) of QoL should be at least one of the presented outcome measures
 
Exclusion criteria:
Studies concerning interventions that were not strictly psychosocial such as complementary therapies
Studies that used a comparison group other than usual care or attentional control group
Studies of which less than 50% of patients had cancer in an advanced stage of the disease
Open in a new tab

Similar to previous reviews (Meyer and Mark, 1995; Barsevick et al, 2002) psychosocial interventions are defined to include counselling/psychotherapy, behaviour therapy, education and provision of information, social support or a combination of interventions. Quality of life was operationalised in global measures of QoL and measures concerning patient's emotional functioning (e.g. coping, mood state such as anxiety and depression or other type of emotional distress), social functioning, physical functioning (e.g. symptom distress, activity level, performance status, activities of daily living) and existential or spiritual concerns.

Methodological quality

The adagium ‘garbage in–garbage out’ reveals that study quality is clearly relevant when conducting a systematic review. There is, however, limited empirical evidence of a relation between specific methodological quality criteria and bias, except for adequate concealment of treatment allocation and double blinding (van Tulder et al, 1997). Especially, the use of summary scores to identify studies of low or high quality is controversial (Moher et al, 1995; Jüni et al, 1999). Consequently, it is generally recommended to assess study quality against individual relevant methodological criteria, depending on the context in which studies are conducted, however, always including criteria concerning the internal validity of studies (Jüni et al, 1999; 2001). In this review the methodological quality of included studies was independently assessed by two reviewers (RU and ML) against nine criteria of internal validity (van Tulder et al, 1997). Each criterion was scored as yes, no or as providing insufficient information for adequate assessment. To ensure standardised scoring, a pilot-tested predesigned table was used. Disagreement among the reviewers was resolved by discussion.

Data extraction

RU and ML independently extracted data. Predesigned tables were used to ensure that data extraction was standardised. Extracted information included: the sample (inclusion/exclusion criteria, type of cancer and disease stage), the setting (inpatient, outpatient, hospice and home-care setting), type of psychosocial intervention (counselling/psychotherapy, behaviour therapy, education and provision of information, social support and other psychosocial approaches), format of psychosocial intervention (group vs individual, structured vs unstructured, therapist, that is, psychotherapist or psychologist vs nurse delivered), time frame of psychosocial intervention (frequency, duration and follow-up), description of comparison group, nature of the outcomes measured (overall QoL, dimensions of QoL and other measured outcomes) and the study design. Disagreement among the reviewers was resolved by discussion.

Only measurements immediately post-treatment were included. When a study compared more than one intervention arm with the control arm, each intervention arm was labelled as a separate trial. It was envisioned that studies would be too heterogeneous to be combined using a formal meta-analysis. Therefore, a narrative synthesis was performed. The results are summarised according to type of intervention used and outcome measures assessed. The magnitudes of effects on each outcome measure are reported as the magnitudes of differences in change scores between groups, relative to the scale used.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies involving 13 trials were identified for inclusion in the review. The search of Medline, PsycInfo and Cinahl databases provided a total of 584 citations (Table 1). After adjusting for duplicates 509 remained. Of these, 479 studies were discarded because after reviewing the abstracts it appeared that these papers clearly did not meet the criteria. Three additional studies (Levy et al, 1990; Lee et al, 1997; Esper et al, 1999) were discarded because full text of the study was not available or the paper could not be feasibly translated into English. The full text of the remaining 27 citations was examined in more detail. It appeared that 22 studies did not meet the inclusion criteria as described (Table 3). Five studies (Connor, 1992; Corner et al, 1996; Scholten et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002; Sloman, 2002) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. An additional five studies (Arathuzik, 1994; Bredin et al, 1999; Edelman et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001) that met the criteria for inclusion were identified by checking the references of located, relevant papers and searching for studies that have cited these papers. No unpublished relevant studies were obtained.

Table 3. Excluded studies (n=22).

Reason for exclusion Studies
Less than 50% of patients with advanced cancer Decker et al (1992), Syrjala et al (1995), Johansson et al (1999), Oyama et al (2000), Carlson et al (2001), Lordick et al (2002) and Walker et al (1999a, b)
   
No controlled study design Greer et al, 1991; Eysenck and Grossarth-Maticek, 1991; Bottomley, 1996; de Vries et al, 1997; Greer and Moorey, 1997; Cwikel and Behar, 1999; Gallagher and Steele, 2001)
   
Intervention not strictly psychosocial Siegel et al (1992), Wilkinson et al (1999) and Ringdal et al (2001)
   
No QoL-related outcome measure Sloman et al (1994) and Bruera et al (1999)
   
Comparison group other than usual care Mantovani et al (1996) and Liossi and White (2001)
Open in a new tab

QoL=quality of life.

Description of included trials

Characteristics of the included trials are shown in Table 4. All 13 included trials used a randomisation procedure to allocate the psychosocial intervention. Included trials were predominantly conducted in Europe (n=3 trials) and the United States of America and Canada (n=6).

Table 4. Characteristics of included trials (n=13).

      Outcomea
      Measures (instruments)b Statistically significant
Study Participants Interventions I=intervention and C= control   P<0.05 Change scorec
Connor (1992) California, USAStudy quality:Concealed treatment allocation: unclear Cointerventions: unclear Compliance: unclear Dropouts: 57%, n and reasons overall described, unclear if comparable between groups Intention to treat: no, patients lost clearly not in analysis Terminally ambulatory ill cancer patientsExcluded if: Karnofsky <50 or cognitively impairedDisease stage: stage IV 100%Gender: 79% femaleMean age (range): 61 year (35–80 year) I-group: counselling (n=13)Content: interview with patient, including questions about, for example, the most difficult aspects of having cancer? patients' believes about recovering from this illness and death?Duration: onceSetting: inpatientFormat: individual, structured, therapist-delivered,d tailor-madeC-group: usual care (no intervention) (n=11) Emotional functioning:Death anxiety (DAS)Denial (DMI) NS+ —Small
           
Arathuzik (1994) Massachusetts, USAStudy quality:Concealed treatment allocation: unclear Cointerventions: unclear Compliance: strict written protocol was followed to administer the intervention Compliance monitored: unclear Dropouts: unclear Intention to treat: unclear Patients with confirmed metastatic breast cancer and experiencing physical painExcluded if: brain metastasis or terminal stageDisease stage: stage IV 100%Gender: 100% femaleAge range: 31–80 years (46%>60 years) I-group 1: behaviour therapy – relaxation and visualisation (n=8)Content: discussion of a detailed description of; effects of relaxation on body and visualisation or mental images on the mind; specific breathing exercise, progressive muscle relaxation exercise and visualisation that would be practiced; conditions required to practise these exercises.Deep breathing exercise, relaxing muscle groups and visualisation exercises.Duration: once 75 minSetting: in-/outpatientFormat: individual, structured, nurse-delivered, standardisedI-group 2: behaviour therapy - relaxation, visualisation and cognitive coping skills training (n=8); setting and format idem as I-group 1 Content: as I-group 1 adding to the discussion: a detailed description of the effects of distraction on pain and a review of written handouts on 23 methods of distraction.Instruction in specific positive affirmation such as ‘I can manage my pain..’Directed in practicing these affirmations and refocusing negative thoughts and feelings.Duration: once 120 minC-group: usual care (routine care and pain medication on an as needed basis) (n=8) Emotional functioning:I-group 1: POMS subscalesI-group 1: ability to decrease pain (Rosenstiel)I-group 2: POMS subscalesI-group 2: ability to decrease pain (Rosenstiel)Physical functioning:I-group 1 and I-group 2: pain distress (Johnson Pain Distress scale) NS+ NS+ NS —Large — Moderate —
           
Corner et al (1996) London, UKStudy quality:Concealed treatment allocation: unclear Cointerventions: unclear Compliance: unclear Dropouts: 41%, n and reasons described by group, comparable between groups Intention to treat: no, patients lost clearly not in analysis Patients with non-small cell lung cancer who completed chemotherapy or radiotherapy suffering breathlessnessExcluded if: not mentionedDisease stage: stage IV 100%Gender: 40% femaleMedian age: Intervention group=55 yearsControl group=69 years I-group: counselling and behaviour therapy (n=19)Content:Detailed assessment of patient's breathlessness, their disease and feelings about the future.Advice and support were given on methods of managing breathlessness and involving family members.Breathing retraining exercises.Goal setting to assist patient to learn breathing and relaxation techniques.Duration: weekly 1 h, 3–6 weeksSetting: outpatientFormat: individual, structured, nurse-delivered, tailor-madeC-group: usual care (detailed assessment of breathlessness - no training or counselling) (n=15) Emotional functioning:Anxiety (HADS)Depression (HADS)Physical functioning:Distress due to breathlessness (VAS)Ability to walk distances/climb stairs (Functional Capacity Scale)Difficulties performing ADL (checklist) NS NS + + + — — Large Small Small
           
Bredin et al (1999) London, UKStudy quality:Concealed treatment allocation: yes Cointerventions: pharmacological interventions monitored and checked for balance Compliance: supervision, audits, using practice guideline to deliver the intervention Compliance monitored: yes, by completing checklist Dropouts: 41%, n and reasons described by group, not comparable between groups Intention to treat: yes Patients with (non-) small cell lung cancer/mesothelioma who completed treatment and reporting breathlessnessExcluded if: not mentionedDisease stage: stage IV 100%Gender:Intervention group=female 20%Control group=female 33%Mean age (range):Intervention group=68 years (41–82 years)Control group=67 years (41–83 years) I-group: counselling and behaviour therapy (n=52)Content: Detailed assessment of breathlessness and factors that ameliorate or exacerbate it.Advice and support for patients and their families on ways of managing breathlessness.Exploration of the meaning of breathlessness, their disease, and feelings about the future.Training in breathing control techniques, progressive muscle relaxation, and distraction exercises.Goal setting to complement breathing and relaxation techniques, to help in the management of functional and social activities and to support the development and adoption of coping strategies.Early recognition of problems warranting pharmacological or medical intervention.Duration: weekly, 3–8 weeksSetting: outpatient, nursing clinicFormat: individual, structured, nurse-delivered and tailor-madeC-group: usual care (standard care, all patients had access to routinely available supportive care, that is, pharmacological, palliative treatments and treatment of associated problems such as anxiety or depression) (n=51) Emotional functioning:Anxiety (HADS)Depression (HADS)Psychological symptom distress (RSCL)Physical functioning:Physical symptom distress (RSCL)Activity level (RSCL)Distress due to breathlessness (VAS)Global measure of QoL:QoL (RSCL) NS + NS + + + NS — Moderate — Large Moderate Large —
           
Edelman et al (1999) Sydney, AustraliaStudy quality:Concealed treatment allocation: yes Cointerventions: participation in outside groups monitored and tested Compliance: unclear Dropouts: 25%, n and reasons described overall, comparable between groups Intention to treat: no, patients lost clearly not in analyses Patients with metastatic breast cancerExcluded if: psychiatric or brain disorder; drug/alcohol dependencyDisease stage: stage IV 100%Gender: 100% femaleMean age (range): 50 years (29–65 years) I-group: behaviour therapy (cognitive–behavioural therapy techniques) and social support (n=62)Content:At the start of the programme a manual was given.Handouts and homework exercises were given at every session. Basic cognitive skills were taught, including how to identify and challenge maladaptive thoughts and beliefs. Behavioural techniques were taught, for example, deep relaxation/meditation as a tool for managing anxiety. A relaxation tape was given to practise on a regular basis. Goal setting and problem solving to gain a greater sense of control.The first hour of each session was spent on discussing homework exercises, involving, for example, the recording of potentially stressful situations that arose during the week, identifying and disputing maladaptive thoughts and underlying beliefs. Participants were also asked to suggest ‘positive actions’ that they could take in order to resolve potentially problematic situations. In the second half of each session a particular theme was discussed. This was followed by discussion with participants reflecting on ways in which they could apply the discussed strategies to their own particular circumstances and experiences.Duration: weekly, 8 weeksSetting: outpatientFormat: group, structured, therapist-delivered and tailor-madeC-group: usual care (standard oncological care) (n=62) Emotional functioning:Anxiety (POMS)Depression (POMS) Anger (POMS) Fatigue (POMS) Confusion (POMS) Vigour (POMS) Total Mood Diaturbance (POMS)Self-esteem (Coopersmith Self Esteem Inventory) NS + NS NS NS NS + + — Small — — — — Small Small
           
Scholten et al (2001) AustriaStudy quality:Concealed treatment allocation: unclear Cointerventions: unclear Compliance: unclear Dropouts: unclear Intention to treat: unclear Patients with metastatic breast cancerExcluded if: central nervous system metastasisDisease stage: stage IV 100%Gender: 100% femaleMean age (s.d.):Intervention group=61.6 years (8.7 years)Control group=62.2 years (8.1 years) I-group: behaviour therapy – cognitive and behavioural approaches (n=20)Content:Strategies as problem solving, regaining control, setting new goals for the future.Therapy focused on patients' coping strategies, self-esteem and femininity, overcoming feeling helpless, negative thoughts and depression, and promotion of a fighting spirit.For symptom control, behavioural techniques (exercises in self-hypnosis and progressive muscle relaxation) were employed.Duration: 6 monthsSetting: outpatientFormat: individual, structured, therapist-delivered and tailor-madeC-group: usual care (patients received no psychosocial support during observation period) (n=23) Emotional functioning: Cognitive, emotional and behavioural coping skills (semi-structured interviews) Global measures of QoL: (Non-) health related quality of life (VAS) NS NS — —
           
Classen et al (2001) California, USAStudy quality:Concealed treatment allocation: yes Cointerventions: all patients were offered self-directed education intervention, use was monitored and checked for balance. Compliance: supervision, use of protocol to deliver intervention Compliance monitored: unclear Dropouts: 18%, n and reasons described by group, acceptable Intention to treat: yes (for patients with at least one follow-up measurement) Patients with confirmed metastatic or recurrent breast cancerExcluded if: Karnofsky score <70 or no metastasis beyond supraclavicular nodesDisease stage: stage IV 100%Gender: 100% femaleMean age (s.d.): Intervention group=54.0 years (10.7 years)Control group=52.9 years (10.7 years) I-group: behaviour therapy (cognitive–behavioural approaches) and social support (n=58)Content: Supportive Expressive Therapy (SET). Therapists were trained to facilitate discussion in an emotionally expressive rather than a didactic format of the following themes:Fears of dying and death including dealing with death of group members.Reordering life priorities.Improving support from and communication with family and friends.Integrating a changed self- and body image.Improving communication with physicians.Learning self-hypnosis for pain an anxiety control.Through sharing of their experiences, group members became role models for one another. Leaders kept members focused on issues central to their diagnoses of metastatic breast cancer and on facing and grieving for their lossesDuration: weekly 1.5 h for 1 yearSetting: outpatientFormat: group, unstructured, therapist-delivered, tailor-madeC-group: usual care (no specific description) (n=44) Emotional functioning:Total Mood Disturbance (POMS)Intrusion and avoidance – total score (IES) + + Small Small
           
Goodwin et al (2001) CanadaStudy quality: Concealed treatment allocation: yes Cointerventions: all patients received educational materials every 4–6 months. Unclear if use was monitored. Participation in support groups was monitored and proved comparable between groups. Compliance: use of protocol, every 9–12 months workshops, review of randomly selected videotaped sessions. Compliance monitored: unclear Dropouts: 34%, n and reasons described overall, comparable between groups Intention to treat: yes Patients with confirmed metastatic breast cancerExcluded if: life expectancy <3 months; no metastasis beyond ipsilateral axilla; central nervous system metastasis; untreated major depression; planned participation in therapist-led support group for patients with metastatic breast cancer outside the study centerDisease stage: stage IV 100%Gender: 100% femaleMean age (s.d.): Intervention group=49.5 years (8.4 years)Control group=51.5 years (10.3 years) I-group: behaviour therapy (cognitive–behavioural approaches) and social support (n=158)Content: SET – see Classen (2001)Duration: 90 min weekly, 1 yearSetting: outpatientFormat: group, unstructured, nurse- and therapist-delivered, tailor-madeC-group: usual care (patients did not receive any psychological therapy as part of the study but could however participate in peer support groups or therapist led support groups that did not involve SET) (n=77) Emotional functioning:Anxiety (POMS)Depression (POMS)Anger (POMS)Fatigue (POMS)Confusion (POMS)Vigour (POMS)Total Mood Disturbance (POMS)Physical functioning:Experience of suffering + + + NS + NS + NS Small Small Small — Small — Small —
           
Giese-Davis et al (2002) California, USAStudy quality: Concealed treatment allocation: yes Cointerventions: all patients were offered educational materials and 1-year membership of a health library. Unclear if use was monitored. Compliance: ongoing supervision, use of protocol Compliance monitored: unclear Dropouts: 42%, n and reasons described overall, not comparable between groups Intention to treat: yes, for patients with at least one follow-up measurement Patients with documented metastatic or recurrent breast cancerExcluded if: Karnofsky score <70 or no metastasis beyond supraclavicular nodes Disease stage: stage IV 100%Gender: 100% femaleMean age (s.d.): Intervention group=52.7 years (10.5 years)Control group=53.8 years (10.5 years) I-group: behaviour therapy (cognitive–behavioural approaches) and social support (n=64)Content: SET – see Classen (2001)Duration: weekly 1.5 h for 1 yearSetting: outpatientFormat: group, unstructured, therapist delivered, tailor-madeC-group: usual care (no specific description) (n=61) Emotional functioning:Anger control (CECS)Depression control (CECS)Anxiety control (CECS)Total score (CECS)Restraint (WAI)Defensiveness (WAI)Confidence communicating emotions (SESES-C)Confidence confronting death (SESES-C)Confidence focusing on present moment (SESES-C)Emotional self-efficacy total score (SESES-C) + + NS + + NS NS NS + NS NEe NEe NEe Small Small — — — NEe —
           
Sloman (2002) IsraelStudy quality:Concealed treatment allocation: unclearCointerventions: unclear Compliance: unclear Dropouts: unclear Intention to treat: unclear Ambulatory patients with advanced cancer experiencing anxiety and depression without ever been trained in progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) or guided imagery (GI) Excluded if: not mentionedDisease stage: stage IV 63%Gender: 46% femaleMean age: 54.4 years (range 27–79 years) I-group 1: behaviour therapy - progressive muscle relaxation training (n=14)Content: Nurse explained the nature of the session and turned on the taped instructions. At the end the nurse had a brief discussion concerning any problems that patients may have experienced in following the instructions.The tape recorder was left to practice PMR technique twice daily. Making of follow-up appointments for the nurse to visit subjects twice weekly to repeat the sessions and deal with any related problems.Cassette tapes contained clear instructions by a clinical psychologist that guided the subjects in the use of the techniques.Duration: 30 min, twice weekly, 3 weeks Emotional functioning:I-group 1: Anxiety (HADS)Depression (HADS)I-group 2: Anxiety (HADS)Depression (HADS)I-group 3: Anxiety (HADS)Depression (HADS)Global measures of QoL:I-group 1: Functional Living Index Cancer Scale (FLIC)I-group 2: Functional Living Index Cancer Scale (FLIC)I-group 3: Functional Living Index Cancer Scale (FLIC) NS + NS + NS + + + + — Small — Small — SmallSmall Small Small
    Setting: home careFormat: individual, structured, nurse delivered, standardizedI-group 2: behaviour therapy-guided imagery; content, duration, setting and format idem as I-group 1 but focus on GI (n=14)I-group 3: behaviour therapy−PMR+GI; content, duration, setting and format idem as I-group 1, but focus on PMR training+GI (n=14)C-group: usual care (no relaxation or imagery training; to control for placebo effect a nurse spent an equal amount of contact time with control subjects and had a general discussion about their concerns relating to their health, nursing care, and medical treatments) (n=14)      
Open in a new tab

QoL=quality of life; s.d.=standard deviation; NS=nonsignificant.

a

Outcomes outside the scope of this review are not presented.

b

POMS=Profile of Moods Scale; HADS=Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; RSCL=Rotterdam Symptom Checklist; IES=Impact of Event Scale; DAS=Death Anxiety Scale; DMI= Defense Mechanisms Inventory; CECS=Courtauld Emotional Control Scale; WAI=Weinburger Adjustment Inventory; SESES-C= Stanford Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale - Cancer; FLIC= Functional Living Index-Cancer Scale.

c

Magnitude of the difference in change scores between groups relative to the scale used – small=change score <25%; moderate=change score between 25 and 50%; large=change score >50%.

d

When therapist is written psychotherapist and psychologist are meant.

e

NE=not evaluable, in this trial slopes analysis was used to measure change over time and only mean change of slope was given for this measure.

Sample characteristics

The mean sample size of the intervention and control group was 39 (range 8–158 patients) and 31 patients (range 8–77 patients), respectively. The average age of patients ranged from 50 to 67 years. In eight trials, the majority of patients were female. Seven trials included only female patients and concerned patients with breast cancer. Six trials recruited patients with cancer at any site. Three trials (Connor, 1992; Corner et al, 1996; Bredin et al, 1999) limited the inclusion to patients who were clearly in far advanced stages of the disease. The mean percentage of patients with advanced disease (stage IV) was 89% (range 63–100%).

Setting

The majority of the trials were conducted in an outpatient (n=7 trials) or home-care setting (n=3). Only one trial was conducted in an in-patient setting. Two trials were conducted in a combination of in- and outpatient settings.

Type of intervention

The content of the experimental psychosocial interventions was quite different. However, behaviour therapy was used in 12 trials, including one or more of the following: relaxation exercises, guided imagery, visualisation or cognitive approaches focusing on changing specific thoughts or beliefs and learning specific coping skills. In six (Arathuzik, 1994; Scholten et al, 2001; Sloman, 2002) of these 12 trials, behaviour therapy was used as a single intervention. A combined intervention of behaviour therapy and group support was used in four trials (Edelman et al, 1999; Goodwin et al, 2001; Classen et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002). The group-support intervention in these trials involved the creation of a supportive environment in which patients were encouraged to express their emotions about cancer and its broad-ranging effects on their lives. Patients were also encouraged to interact with and support each other. Practical or structural aspects of social support were not covered in these studies. Two trials (Corner et al, 1996; Bredin et al, 1999) combined behaviour therapy with counselling and involved training in breathing control techniques, relaxation and distraction exercises. In addition, the meaning of breathlessness, their disease and patients' feelings about the future were explored. Counselling was used as a single intervention in one trial. In this trial (Connor, 1992), terminally ill ambulatory patients were interviewed to create an opportunity for the patient to explore and to gain insight into his own coping processes. The interview was paced so that those who gave guarded responses were not required to elaborate. Subjects who were less guarded were encouraged to talk more about their feelings, perceptions and memories.

Format of the intervention

Four trials (Edelman et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002) delivered the intervention in a group format. Nurses or both nurses and therapists, that is, psychotherapists or psychologists, delivered the intervention in a majority of trials (n=8). In eight trials interventions were tailor-made to the needs and preferences of included patients, whereas the intervention in five trials was standardised. A total of 10 trials involved a multisession intervention, of which four trials (Edelman et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002) delivered the intervention during a period of 8 weeks or longer (up to 1 year).

Outcome measures

Outcome measures to investigate the effects of the interventions were all questionnaire based except in one trial (Scholten et al, 2001), which additionally used semistructured interviews.

Outcome measures were strongly heterogeneous, especially coping measures, measures of physical functioning and global measures of QoL.

Five different measures of emotional distress were used across 11 trials. The Profile of Mood States (McNair et al, 1992) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (Zigmond and Snaith, 1983) were the most frequently used (n=5 trials) measures. The Rotterdam Symptom Checklist, psychological symptom distress subscale (De Haes et al, 1996), was used in the trial of Bredin et al (1999). In one trial (Edelman et al, 1999), the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory (Myhill and Lorr, 1978) was used. In another trial (Connor, 1992), death anxiety was measured using a scale of the same name (McMordie, 1979).

Seven different measures of coping were used across six trials. The Courtauld Emotional Control Scale (Watson and Greer, 1983), Weinburger Adjustment Inventory (Weinberger, 1997) and Stanford Emotional Self-Efficay Scale – Cancer (Giese-Davis et al, 2002) were used in a trial (Giese-Davis et al, 2002) to, respectively, measure the extent to which patients report they suppress negative affect, restrain from aggressive behaviour and are emotional self-efficacious. Patients' perceived ability to decrease or control pain (Rosenstiel and Keefe, 1983) was measured in two trials (Arathuzik, 1994). In one trial (Connor, 1992), the use of denial was measured by the Defense Mechanism Inventory (Gleser and Sacks, 1973). In another trial (Classen et al, 2001), the Impact of Event Scale (IES) (Sundin and Horowitz, 2002) was used to measure symptoms of intrusion and avoidance. Semistructured interviews to measure coping skills were used once (Scholten et al, 2001).

Physical functioning was measured across five trials by six different measures of physical functioning, varying from the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist, physical symptom distress subscale (De Haes et al, 1996) to a visual analogue scale measuring distress due to breathlessness (Corner et al, 1996; Bredin et al, 1999).

Four different global measures of QoL, for example, the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist subscale – overall evaluation of QoL and the Functional Living Index – cancer scale, were used across five trials.

Methodological quality of included trials

The methodological quality of the included trials is summarised in Table 5. In five trials (Bredin et al, 1999; Edelman et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002), treatment allocation was adequately concealed. This was either carried out through central off-site randomisation, block randomisation or an adaptive randomisation-biased coin design. In eight trials, insufficient information was available to assess if concealment of treatment allocation was adequately performed.

Table 5. Methodological quality of included trials (n=13).

  No. of trials (%)
Quality indicator Yes, fulfilled No Unclear
Method of randomisation 13 (100%) — —
Adequate concealment of allocation 5 (38%) — 8 (62%)
       
Groups similar at baseline:
Gender 10 (77%) — 3 (23%)
Age 6 (46%) 3 (23%) 4 (31%)
Functional status 6 (46%) 1 (8%) 6 (46%)
Emotional distress 8 (62%) 1 (8%) 4 (31%)
Key outcome measures 9 (69%) 1 (8%) 3 (23%)
       
Cointerventions:      
Cointerventions avoided by trial design 3 (23%) 10 (77%) —
Cointerventions monitored 4 (31%) — 9 (69%)
       
Compliance monitored and acceptable 6 (46%) — 7 (54%)
       
Blinded outcome assessment for at least one key outcome — 13 (100%) —
       
Relevant outcome measures 13 (100%) — —
       
Withdrawal/dropout rate:
N and reasons described 7 (54%) — 6 (46%)
% lost ⩽20% or comparable between groups 4 (31%) 2 (15%) 7 (54%)
       
Comparable timing of outcome assessment in both groups 13 (100%) — —
       
Intention-to-treat analyses explicitly stated 4 (31%) 3 (23%) 6 (46%)
Open in a new tab

The number of trials that had similar groups at baseline with regard to the most important prognostic indicators ranged from six trials for age and functional status to 10 trials for gender. Nine trials had similar groups at baseline for the key outcome measures (see Table 5, Section 2). One trial (Corner et al, 1996) reported that groups were not similar at baseline, that is, patients in the intervention group had higher distress caused by breathlessness, higher anxiety levels and greater difficulty performing activities of daily living.

All 13 trials gave a relatively detailed description of the intervention. With regard to care in the control group, nine trials explicitly mentioned patients received usual, standard or routine care. Five of these trials (Bredin et al, 1999; Goodwin et al, 2001; Sloman, 2002) gave a fairly detailed description of this type of care.

Avoidance of cointerventions by trial design or monitoring of the use of cointerventions was mentioned in five trials. Concerning avoidance of cointerventions by trial design, three trials (Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002) controlled for imbalance in the use of information by offering educational materials to patients in both the intervention and control group. Of which, the trial of Classen et al (2001) also mentioned the monitoring of the use of these educational materials. Participation of patients in outside support groups was monitored by Edelman et al (1999) and Goodwin et al (2001). Bredin et al (1999) monitored the use of pharmacological interventions.

One trial (Bredin et al, 1999) explicitly mentioned the monitoring of compliance. Six trials (Arathuzik, 1994; Bredin et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002) mentioned the use of a protocol, supervision, reviews of videotaped intervention sessions or side visits to ensure that the intervention was delivered as intended.

The withdrawal/dropout of patients was described in seven trials; three trials (Corner et al, 1996; Bredin et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001) described number and reasons for dropout by group and four trials (Connor, 1992; Edelman et al, 1999; Goodwin et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002) described this for the total sample. The drop-out rate was considered acceptable when 20% or less (Classen et al, 2001) or comparable between groups (Corner et al, 1996; Edelman et al, 1999; Goodwin et al, 2001). The dropout rate ranged from 18 to 57%.

Approximately one-third of the trials (Bredin et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002) explicitly stated that intention-to-treat analyses were used to deal with patients who were lost to follow-up. However, two trials (Classen et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002) limited this intention-to-treat analyses to patients with at least one follow-up measurement. Three trials (Connor, 1992; Corner et al, 1996; Edelman et al, 1999) did not use intention-to-treat analyses, that is, patients lost to follow-up were clearly not in the analyses.

Parametrical statistical tests were used in 10 trials (Connor, 1992; Arathuzik, 1994; Edelman et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002; Sloman, 2002). Nonparametrical tests were used in three trials (Corner et al, 1996; Bredin et al, 1999; Scholten et al, 2001). Eight trials compared four or more outcome measures. All trials used a P-value of 0.05 as the limit of statistical significance.

Effects on QoL

Outcomes of trials that aimed at improving one of the dimensions of patients' QoL are summarised in Table 4.

Emotional functioning – distress

Anxiety and depression as measures of emotional functioning were used in 10 trials (Arathuzik, 1994; Corner et al, 1996; Bredin et al, 1999; Edelman et al, 1999; Classen et al, 2001; Goodwin et al, 2001; Sloman, 2002). One trial (Goodwin et al, 2001) showed a statistically significant treatment effect for anxiety. Whereas in six trials (Sloman et al, 2002; Bredin et al, 1999; Edelman et al, 1999; Goodwin et al, 2001), a statistically significant treatment effect for depression was found. Patients' self-esteem improved significantly following the combined intervention of behaviour therapy and group support (Edelman et al, 1999). No significant effect was found for death anxiety as an outcome of an individual counselling intervention in a sample of ambulatory terminally ill patients (Connor, 1992).

Emotional functioning – coping

In five of the six trials (Connor, 1992; Arathuzik, 1994; Classen et al, 2001; Scholten et al, 2001; Giese-Davis et al, 2002) in which patients' coping abilities were measured, a significant treatment effect was found. One of these trials (Giese-Davis et al, 2002) investigated the effects of supportive-expressive group therapy on emotion-regulation outcome measures and found a significant reduction in suppression of feelings of anger, sadness and fear while also showing a significant improvement in greater restraint of aggressive, inconsiderate, irresponsible and impulsive behaviour. Furthermore, patients in the treatment group reported that they were significantly better able to focus on the present. Another trial (Classen et al, 2001) also investigating supportive-expressive group therapy showed a significant reduction in total scores on IES, measuring symptoms of intrusion and avoidance. Two trials (Arathuzik, 1994) examining individual behavioural therapy showed a significant improvement of patients' perceived ability to decrease/control their pain. One trial (Connor, 1992) found a significant reduction in the use of denial by patients receiving individual counselling compared to patients in the control group.

Physical functioning

Positive effects were seen in two of five trials (Arathuzik, 1994; Corner et al, 1996; Bredin et al, 1999; Goodwin et al, 2001) measuring physical functioning. Both trials (Corner et al, 1996; Bredin et al, 1999) investigated the effects of a nursing intervention for breathlessness in patients with lung cancer involving a combination of individual behaviour therapy and counselling, and found a significant improvement for physical symptom distress, activity level and functional capacity.

Global measures of QoL

Significant improvements of QoL were found in three of the five trials (Bredin et al, 1999; Scholten et al, 2001; Sloman, 2002) measuring overall QoL. More specifically, results showed an improvement of scores on the Functional Living Index – cancer scale (Sloman, 2002).

DISCUSSION

Main results

Evidence to date indicated that psychosocial interventions pertaining to the field of behaviour therapy were beneficial for patients with advanced cancer. Of 13 included trials, 12 showed positive effects on one or more indicators of QoL. The main benefit is an improvement of depression and feelings of sadness.

Coping also improved, especially a reduction in suppression of negative affect and an improvement in the restraint of inconsiderate and impulsive behaviour. As most effects were of a small magnitude, it is unclear if these effects are of clinical significance. Yet, as the effects reflected changes on measures that are important to patients with advanced cancer, that is, alleviating distress or improving patient's (perceived) functioning in daily life, even small effects can be clinically significant.

This review illustrated that the most frequently used type of psychosocial interventions for patients with advanced cancer was behaviour therapy as a single or combined intervention. Behaviour therapy was associated with cognitive-behavioural techniques and is an approach used to modify behaviour. This approach is based on the belief that cognitions prompt and mediate behaviour and that they are amenable to change. Behaviour therapy intends to help patients acquire strategies to better manage their behaviour, for example, increasing such skills as voluntary relaxation of the skeletal muscles, diverting attention away from pain or other distressing symptoms, reinterpreting pain or other distressing symptoms by changing unhelpful thoughts and believes, and developing a view of oneself that emphasises a sense of mastery of control and self-reinforcement of adaptive behaviour.

The review showed that therapists, that is, psychotherapist or psychologists, nurses or nurses and therapists combined, delivered behaviour therapy. It is worth noting that the interventions given by a therapist were tailor-made, predominantly with a group format and taking longer than 8 weeks, whereas interventions delivered by nurses or nurses and therapists combined were predominantly standardised, individual and given over an 8-week period or shorter. This review, however, does not answer the question whether certain characteristics of the intervention, for example, shorter or longer duration, an individual or group format, standardised or tailor-made and delivered by either therapists, nurses or nurse and therapist combined, might influence the effect, as it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis and subgroup analyses because of the heterogeneity of the data.

Furthermore, the results of the individual trials illustrate that outcome measures pertaining to the QoL dimension of emotional functioning, that is, anxiety and depression, were most frequently measured. Physical functioning and global measures of QoL were less frequently used. Similarly, measures of social functioning were not used. In addition, variables concerning the spiritual or existential domain of QoL were never measured. Especially in the case of patients with advanced cancer, it appeared that this domain is of great importance to patients and should not be ignored (Cohen et al, 1996; Rinck et al, 1997; Skeel, 1998).

Limitations

This review was conducted rigorously and provides a balanced assessment of the current evidence. The search was extensive and it is unlikely that controlled trials were missed. Efforts have been made to identify unpublished studies. Despite this the review may be subject to publication bias, although we did not find that trials reporting beneficial results were the methodological weaker trials. A formal method of assessing publication bias, for example, funnel plots, could, however, not be performed because of great heterogeneity among the trials.

The conclusions that can be drawn from this review should be treated with some caution, because of the limitations in the evidence. There were problems with the validity of the studies. Limited details of the methods used in the trial, including methods of randomisation, monitoring of the use of cointerventions and compliance, were available. Especially in trials with advanced cancer patients, where care needs and preferences of patients vary greatly and where because of this cointerventions cannot be avoided, it is of great importance that all cointerventions are monitored and checked for imbalance between groups (Rinck et al, 1997). The same holds true for the monitoring of compliance. Although blinding of the outcome assessment is undoubtedly an important methodological quality indicator, in trials where outcome measures are self-reported and patients know which group they were allocated to, this is clearly impossible. Another limitation concerns the attrition of patients. In trials with advanced cancer, patients' untimely attrition must be expected and accounted for; however, limited details concerning patient attrition were available in about half of the included trials. A further limitation concerns the similarity of groups at baseline for key outcome measures. One trial reported an imbalance in baseline values and possibly affected the outcomes of physical functioning in this particular trial. Another limitation involves the statistical power of the trials. Some trials were clearly underpowered. On the other hand, it appeared that even these underpowered trials showed statistical significant changes, which possibly could have achieved the level of clear clinical significance when adequately powered. Also, limited details concerning the appropriateness of statistical analyses were given. Another limitation concerns the multiple comparisons that were made in most of the trials without adjusting their limit of statistical significance. However, to elude this ‘data-dredging’ phenomenon that possibly occurred in some of the trials, relevant outcome measures for this review were a priori selected.

The generalisability of the results from the included trials is questionable to the extent that performance status and life expectancy criteria applied in the majority of the studies will have led to the selection of patients who may have been somewhat healthier than those who would be offered psychosocial intervention in practice.

CONCLUSION

In summary, there is an indication that psychosocial intervention using cognitive-behavioural techniques are beneficial for the QoL of patients with advanced cancer, especially in the domain of emotional functioning. However, evidence is limited as there have been few large methodological strong trials. On the other hand, it is nearly impossible that all methodological quality criteria will be met when conducting a trial in the field of palliative care. Undoubtedly, scientific rigour should always be aimed at. However, at the same time one needs to consider that given the circumstances of providing care to patients with advanced cancer, this demand resembles a mathematical asymptotic function, where regardless of effort total rigour cannot be achieved. As nearly all included trials focused on behaviour therapy, nothing can be inferred about the effectiveness of nonbehaviour therapy techniques.

Based on the results and above consideration, the authors of this review conclude that practitioners and health educators should consider an intervention involving techniques of behaviour therapy to address emotional distress in patients with advanced cancer. It remains unclear if a particular format of behaviour therapy is more beneficial than others. More research testing the effects of psychosocial interventions in patients with advanced cancer is needed. For future research, it is recommended to (also) involve outcome measures pertaining to the existential/spiritual domain of QoL, to address the issues of clinical significance and statistical power, to provide information in sufficient detail making methodological assessment possible, to form comparable groups on key outcome measures and to monitor the use of cointerventions and compliance.

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr Wilma Scholte op Reimer (state of the art study coordinator) Nursing Sciences, University Medical Center Nijmegen, Yvonne Heynen-Kaales (national state of the art study coordinator), The Netherlands Centre for Excellence in Nursing (LEVV), Utrecht and the ZONMW who commissioned and funded this project. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of ZONMW. We also thank helpful librarians at University Medical Center Nijmegen Library for their assistance with the literature searching.

References

  1. Andersen C, Adamsen L (2001) Continuous video recording: a new clinical research tool for studying the nursing care of cancer patients. J Adv Nurs 35: 257–267 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Arathuzik D (1994) Effects of cognitive-behavioral strategies on pain in cancer patients. Cancer Nurs 17: 207–214 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barsevick AM, Sweeney C, Haney E, Chung E (2002) A systematic qualitative analysis of psychoeducational interventions for depression in patients with cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 29: 73–84 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bottomley A (1996) Group cognitive behavioural therapy: an intervention for cancer patients. Int J Palliat Nurs 2: 131–137 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bredin M, Corner J, Krishnasamy M, Plant H, Bailey C, A'Hern R (1999) Multicentre randomised controlled trial of nursing intervention for breathlessness in patients with lung cancer. BMJ 318: 901–904 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bruera E, Pituskin E, Calder K, Neumann CM, Hanson J (1999) The addition of an audiocassette recording of a consultation to written recommendations for patients with advanced cancer: a randomized, controlled trial. Cancer 86: 2420–2425 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Carlson LE, Ursuliak Z, Goodey E, Angen M, Speca M (2001) The effects of a mindfulness meditation-based stress reduction program on mood and symptoms of stress in cancer outpatients: 6-month follow-up. Support Care Cancer 9: 112–123 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Classen C, Butler LD, Koopman C, Miller E, DiMiceli S, Giese-Davis J, Fobair P, Carlson RW, Kraemer HC, Spiegel D (2001) Supportive-expressive group therapy and distress in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a randomized clinical intervention trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry 58: 494–501 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohen SR, Mount BM, Tomas JJ, Mount LF (1996) Existential well-being is an important determinant of quality of life. Evidence from the McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire. Cancer 77: 576–586 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Connor SR (1992) Denial in terminal illness: to intervene or not to intervene. Hosp J 8: 1–15 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Corner J, Plant H, A'-Hern R, Bailey C (1996) Non-pharmacological intervention for breathlessness in lung cancer. Palliat Med 10: 199–305 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cwikel JG, Behar LC (1999) Social work with adult cancer patients: a vote-count review of intervention research. Soc Work Health Care 29: 39–67 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. De Haes J, Olschewski M, Fayers P, Visser MRM, Cull A, Hopwood P, Sanderman R (1996) The Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL): a manual. Groningen: Northern Centre for Health Care Research, University of Groningen [Google Scholar]
  14. de Vries MJ, Schilder JN, Mulder CL, Vrancken AME, Remie ME, Garssen B (1997) Phase II study of psychotherapeutic intervention in advanced cancer. Psycho-Oncology 6: 129–137 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Decker TW, Cline-Elsen J, Gallagher M (1992) Relaxation therapy as an adjunct in radiation oncology. J Clin Psychol 48: 388–393 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Dennison S (1995) An exploration of the communication that takes place between nurses and patients whilst cancer chemotherapy is administered. J Clin Nurs 4: 227–233 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Devine EC, Westlake SK (1995) The effects of psychoeducational care provided to adults with cancer: meta-analysis of 116 studies. Oncol Nurs Forum 22: 1369–1381 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Edelman S, Bell DR, Kidman AD (1999) A group cognitive behaviour therapy programme with metastatic breast cancer patients. Psycho-Oncology 8: 295–305 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Esper P, Hampton JN, Finn J, Smith DC, Regiani S, Pienta KJ (1999) A new concept in cancer care: the supportive care program. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 16: 713–722 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Eysenck HJ, Grossarth-Maticek R (1991) Creative innovation behaviour therapy as a prophylactic treatment for cancer and coronary heart disease: Part II – Effects of treatment. Behav Res Ther 29: 17–31 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Fallowfield L, Saul J, Gilligan B (2001) Teaching senior nurses how to teach communication skills in oncology. Cancer Nurs 24: 185–191 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ford S, Fallowfield L, Lewis S (1996) Doctor-patient interactions in oncology. Soc Sci Med 42: 1511–1519 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Gallagher LM, Steele AL (2001) Developing and using a computerized database for music therapy in palliative medicine. J Palliat Care 17: 147–154 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Giese-Davis J, Koopman C, Butler LD, Classen C, Cordova M, Fobair P, Benson J, Kraemer HC, Spiegel D (2002) Change in emotion-regulation strategy for women with metastatic breast cancer following supportive-expressive group therapy. J Consult Clin Psychol 70: 916–925 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Gleser G, Sacks M (1973) Ego defenses and reaction to stress: a validation study of the Defense Mechanisms Inventory. J Consult Clin Psychol 40: 181–187 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Goodwin PJ, Leszcz M, Ennis M, Koopmans J, Vincent L, Guther H, Drysdale E, Hundleby M, Chochinov HM, Navarro M, Speca M, Hunter J (2001) The effect of group psychosocial support on survival in metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 345: 1719–1726 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Greer S, Moorey S (1997) Adjuvant psychological therapy for cancer patients. Palliat Med 11: 240–244 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Greer S, Moorey S, Baruch J (1991) Evaluation of adjuvant psychological therapy for clinically referred cancer patients. Br J Cancer 63: 257–260 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Heaven CM, Maguire P (1997) Disclosure of concerns by hospice patients and their identification by nurses. Palliat Med 11: 283–290 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Hotopf M, Chidgey J, Addington-Hall J, Ly KL (2002) Depression in advanced disease: a systematic review Part 1. Prevalence and case finding. Palliat Med 16: 81–97 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Johansson B, Berglund G, Glimelius B, Holmberg L, Sjoden P (1999) Intensified primary cancer care: a randomized study of home care nurse contacts. J Adv Nurs 30: 1137–1146 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M (2001) Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 323: 42–46 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M (1999) The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA 282: 1054–1060 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Lee S, Wang S, Lieu M, Shiau C (1997) Effects of a nursing model for hospice care on improving grief response to cancer patients in a general hospital (Chinese). Nurs Res China 5: 6–18 [Google Scholar]
  35. Levy S, Herberman RB, Rodin J, Seligman M (1990) Psychological and immunological effects of a randomized psychosocial treatment trial for colon cancer and malignant melanoma patients. In Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Cancer Psychotherapy Intervention Studies, Balner H, van Rood Y (eds) pp 75–88, Bristol: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers [Google Scholar]
  36. Liossi C, White P (2001) Efficacy of clinical hypnosis in the enhancement of quality of life of terminally ill cancer patients. Contemp Hypnosis 18: 145–160 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lordick F, Gundel H, von Schilling C, Wurschmidt F, Leps B, Sendler A, Schussler J, Brandl T, Peschel C, Sellschopp A (2002) Strukturierte Patientenschulung in der Onkologie. Eine prospektive Studie zur Implementierung und Wirksamkeit einer interdisziplinaren psychoedukativen Gruppenintervention an einer deutschen Universitatsklinik. (Structured patient education in oncology. A prospective study for implementing and effectiveness of interdisciplinary psycho-educational group intervention at a German university clinic). Med Klin 97: 449–454 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Maguire P (1999) Improving communication with cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 35: 1415–1422 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Maguire P, Booth K, Elliott C, Jones B (1996) Helping health professionals involved in cancer care acquire key interviewing skills – the impact of workshops. Eur J Cancer 32A: 1486–1489 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Mantovani G, Astara G, Lampis B, Bianchi A, Curreli L, Orru W, Carta MG, Carpiniello B, Contu P, Rudas N (1996) Evaluation by multidimensional instruments of health-related quality of life of elderly cancer patients undergoing three different ‘psychosocial’ treatment approaches. A randomized clinical trial. Support Care Cancer 4: 129–140 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Massie MJ, Popkin MK (1998) Depressive Disorders. In Psycho-Oncology, Holland JC (ed) pp 518–540, New York: Oxford University Press Inc. [Google Scholar]
  42. McMordie WR (1979) Improving measurement of death anxiety. Psychol Rep 44: 975–980 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. McNair DM, Lorr M, Droppleman LF (1992) Edits Manual for the Profile of Mood States. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service [Google Scholar]
  44. Meyer TJ, Mark MM (1995) Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized experiments. Health Psychology 14: 101–108 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S (1995) Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials 16: 62–73 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Myhill J, Lorr M (1978) The Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory: analysis and partial validation of a modified adult form. J Clin Psychol 34: 72–76 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Newell SA, Sanson-Fisher RW, Savolainen NJ (2002) Systematic Review of Psychological Therapies for Cancer Patients: Overview and Recommendations for Future Research. JNCI Cancer Spectrum 94: 558–584 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Osse BH, Vernooij Dassen MJ, de Vree BP, Schade E, Grol RP (2000) Assessment of the need for palliative care as perceived by individual cancer patients and their families: a review of instruments for improving patient participation in palliative care. Cancer 88: 900–911 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Oyama H, Kaneda M, Katsumata N, Akechi T, Ohsuga M (2000) Using the bedside wellness system during chemotherapy decreases fatigue and emesis in cancer patients. J Med Syst 24: 173–182 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Pasacreta JV, Pickett M (1998) Psychosocial aspects of palliative care. Semin Oncol Nurs 14: 110–120 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Rinck GC, Van den Bos GA, Kleijnen J, de Haes HJ, Schade E, Veenhof CH (1997) Methodologic issues in effectiveness research on palliative cancer care: a systematic review. J Clin Oncol 15: 1697–1707 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Ringdal GI, Jordhoy MS, Ringdal K, Kaasa S (2001) The first year of grief and bereavement in close family members to individuals who have died of cancer. Palliat Med 15: 91–105 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Robinson KA, Dickersin K (2002) Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed. Int J Epidemiol 31: 150–153 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Rosenstiel AK, Keefe FJ (1983) The use of coping strategies in chronic low back pain patients: relationship to patient characteristics and current adjustment. Pain 17: 33–44 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Sanson-Fisher R, Girgis A, Boyes A, Bonevski B, Burton L, Cook P (2000) The unmet supportive care needs of patients with cancer. Supportive Care Review Group. Cancer 88: 226–237 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Scholten C, Weinlander G, Krainer M, Frischenschlager O, Zielinski CC (2001) Difference in patient's acceptance of early versus late initiation of psychosocial support in breast cancer. Support Care Cancer 9: 459–464 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Sheard T, Maguire P (1999) The effect of psychological interventions on anxiety and depression in cancer patients: results of two meta-analyses. Br J Cancer 80: 1770–1780 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Siegel K, Mesagno FP, Karus DG, Christ G (1992) Reducing the prevalence of unmet needs for concrete services of patients with cancer. Evaluation of a computerized telephone outreach system. Cancer 69: 1873–1883 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Skeel RT (1998) Measurement of outcomes in supportive oncology. In Principles and Practice of Supportive Oncology, Berger A, Portenoy RK, Weissman DE (eds) pp 875–888, Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers [Google Scholar]
  60. Slevin ML, Nichols SE, Downer SM, Wilson P, Lister TA, Arnott S, Maher J, Souhami RL, Tobias JS, Goldstone AH, Cody M (1996) Emotional support for cancer patients: what do patients really want? Br J Cancer 74: 1275–1279 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Sloman R (2002) Relaxation and imagery for anxiety and depression control in community patients with advanced cancer. Cancer Nurs 25: 432–435 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Sloman R, Brown P, Aldana E, Chee E (1994) The use of relaxation for the promotion of comfort and pain relief in persons with advanced cancer. Contemp Nurse 3: 6–12 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Soothill K, Morris SM, Harman J, Francis B, Thomas C, McILLMURRAY MB (2001) The significant unmet needs of cancer patients: probing psychosocial concerns. Support Care Cancer 9: 597–605 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Suchman AL, Markakis K, Beckman HB, Frankel R (1997) A model of empathic communication in the medical interview. JAMA 277: 678–682 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Sundin EC, Horowitz MJ (2002) Impact of Event Scale: psychometric properties. Br J Psychiatry 180: 205–209 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Syrjala KL, Donaldson GW, Davis MW, Kippes ME, Carr JE (1995) Relaxation and imagery and cognitive-behavioral training reduce pain during cancer treatment: a controlled clinical trial. Pain 63: 189–198 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Trijsburg RW, van Knippenberg FC, Rijpma SE (1992) Effects of psychological treatment on cancer patients: a critical review. Psychosom Med 54: 489–517 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Uitterhoeve R, Duijnhouwer E, Ambaum B, Van Achterberg T (2003) Turning toward the psychosocial domain of oncology nursing: a main problem analysis in the Netherlands. Cancer Nurs 26: 18–27 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. van Tulder MW, Assendelft WJ, Koes BW, Bouter LM (1997) Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group for Spinal Disorders. Spine 22: 2323–2330 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. van't Spijker A, Trijsburg RW, Duivenvoorden HJ (1997) Psychological sequelae of cancer diagnosis: a meta-analytical review of 58 studies after 1980. Psychosom Med 59: 280–293 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Visser O, Coebergh JWW, van Dijck JAAM, Siesling Se (2002) Incidence of Cancer in the Netherlands 1998. Utrecht: Vereniging van Integrale Kankercentra [Google Scholar]
  72. Walker LG, Heys SD, Walker MB, Ogston K, Miller ID, Hutcheon AW, Sarkar TK, Ah-See AK, Eremin O (1999a) Psychological factors can predict the response to primary chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 35: 1783–1788 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Walker LG, Walker MB, Ogston K, Heys SD, Ah-See AK, Miller ID, Hutcheon AW, Sarkar TK, Eremin O (1999b) Psychological, clinical and pathological effects of relaxation training and guided imagery during primary chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 80: 262–268 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Watson M, Greer S (1983) Development of a questionnaire measure of emotional control. J Psychosom Res 27: 299–305 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Weinberger DA (1997) Distress and self-restraint as measures of adjustment across the life span: confirmatory factor analyses in clinical and nonclinical samples. Psychol Assess 9: 132–135 [Google Scholar]
  76. Wilkinson S (1991) Factors which influence how nurses communicate with cancer patients. J Adv Nurs 16: 677–688 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Wilkinson S, Aldridge J, Salmon I, Cain E, Wilson B (1999) An evaluation of aromatherapy massage in palliative care. Palliat Med 13: 409–417 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Zabora JR, Blanchard CG, Smith ED, Roberts CS, Glajchen M, Sharp JW, BrintzenhofeSzoc KM, Locher JW, Carr EW, Best-Castner S, Smith PM, Dozier-Hall D, Polinsky ML, Hedlund SC (1997) Prevalence of psychological distress among cancer patients across the disease continuum. J Psychosoc Oncol 15: 73–87 [Google Scholar]
  79. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP (1983) The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 67: 361–370 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Journal of Cancer are provided here courtesy of Cancer Research UK

RESOURCES