Skip to main content
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences logoLink to Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences
. 2020 Aug 26;50(5):1364–1370. doi: 10.3906/sag-2001-228

Posttraumatic growth and death anxiety in caregivers of cancer patients: PHOENIX study

Ali ALKAN 1,*, Elif Berna KÖKSOY 2, Ebru KARCI 3, Aslı ALKAN 4, Eduardo BRUERA 5, Filiz ÇAY ŞENLER 2
PMCID: PMC7491265  PMID: 32490635

Abstract

Background/aim

Posttraumatic growth (PTG) is defined as positive psychological changes following a challenging or traumatic life event. The purpose of this study is to define the predictors of PTG and death anxiety (DAN) in caregivers of cancer patients and evaluate the impact of DAN on PTG.

Materials and methods

The caregivers of cancer patients were evaluated using structured questionnaires, including a validated PTG scale and Templer death anxiety scale.

Results

In 3 different cancer centers, 426 participants were evaluated. In multivariate analysis of factors associated with PTG, a high DAN score was the only parameter associated with high PTG scores [OR: 1.6, CI (95%) 1.02–2.5, P = 0.03]. In multivariate analysis of factors associated with DAN, female sex was the only risk factor for high DAN scores [OR: 1.6, CI (95%) 1.1–2.8, P = 0.049]. There was a positive correlation between PTG and DAN scores (r = 0.15, P = 0.001). Higher DAN scores were associated with positive impacts on self-perception (37.0 versus 35.0, P = 0.02), philosophy of life (16.0 versus 13.0, P = 0.035), and changes in relationship (16.0 versus 14.0, P = 0.01)

Conclusions

This is the first report regarding the association between DAN and PTG. We found a positive impact of death anxiety on psychological changes in caregivers of cancer patients.

Keywords: Posttraumatic growth, death anxiety, caregivers, relatives, cancer

1. Introduction

Caregiving a loved one diagnosed with cancer involves providing important emotional, practical, and physical care. However, it is a complex and sometimes overwhelming task. The caregivers of cancer patients (CCPs) are exposed to psychosocial and physical problems, e.g., psychological distress, a decrease in quality of life, and lack of satisfaction in relationships. However, people facing highly stressful life events such as cancer may experience both negative and positive outcomes [1].

Posttraumatic growth (PTG) is defined as positive psychological changes that occur following a meaningfully challenging or traumatic life event [2]. After a traumatic event, an individual’s assumptions about the world, themselves, and others are damaged. This change causes a reevaluation and rebuilding of belief systems [3]. A diagnosis of cancer and its consequences may become a series of traumas for CCPs. However, it is hypothesized that CCPs may experience positive changes, e.g., closer relationships with others, a greater appreciation of life, clarification of life priorities, increased faith, and more empathy for others [4]. The factors influencing PTG in CCPs are social support, quality of the spousal relationship, spouse’s PTG, younger age, intrusive thoughts, and marital satisfaction; there is an increase in PTG with shorter diagnosis periods [5,6].

Death anxiety (DAN) is a group of psychological reactions originating from the idea that the self does not exist [7]. The presence of an incurable disease and conscious awareness of mortality can promote DAN [8]. Death anxiety causes a decrease in quality of life, both in patients and CCPs [9,10].

In the literature, PTG has been studied from different perspectives, and there are different models to explain its origin. The Janus-face model explains PTG as a defensive reaction against trauma [11]. In addition, to avoid its deleterious effects, the survivors of trauma try to change losses into benefits. We hypothesized that fear of death, and the related DAN, could motivate individuals to mobilize against the trauma. There is limited data about the positive impacts of DAN on cancer patients and CCPs. Gunst et al. demonstrated a positive correlation between fear of death and PTG in adolescent cancer patients [12]. Luszczynska et al. evaluated the effect of mortality reminders on PTG in breast cancer survivors [3]. They concluded that women exposed to mortality reminders reported lower PTG. In light of limited data about DAN and PTG, studying CCPs who are continuously exposed to psychological trauma and its consequences may provide valuable data for the field of PTG. This study aims to define the predictors of PTG and DAN in CCPs and to evaluate the impact of DAN on PTG.

2. Materials and methods

The study was designed as a multicenter survey and was conducted in 3 cancer centers in Turkey. An institutional ethics committee approved the study protocol, and the study was carried out following the ethical standards of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. All the participants signed informed consent.

The caregivers of cancer patients admitted to outpatient clinics were evaluated. Individuals who were ≥18 years of age were included. The study was held in outpatient clinics that cared for patients over 16 years of age with all types of cancers at any stage. To evaluate the effects of the disease, we included the relatives of patients in remission, patients undergoing adjuvant or palliative therapy, and in those in palliative care. Those with a history of cancer or neuropsychiatric illness that impeded participation in the survey were excluded. During statistical analysis the ages of participants were grouped according to the median age of 40. Income parameters were grouped according to the average wage in Turkey (i.e. 2000 TL) and divided into low or high income. In addition, the length of follow-up was divided into long or short according to the median follow-up time (6 months), and educational status was analyzed as illiterate/literate versus additional education.

The caregivers of cancer patients were evaluated using structured questionnaires; illiterate individuals were evaluated using face-to-face interviews. The questionnaires collected demographic data, information on sociocultural background (presence of siblings, monthly household income, etc.), comorbidities, educational status, job status, and history of psychiatric admissions. In addition to evaluating the effects of patient characteristics on caregiver parameters, information regarding patient age, primary diagnosis, time to follow-up, and disease status was obtained from medical reports. The attending physician recorded the relation of the participant. Participants were asked about their attitude towards screening tests after the cancer diagnosis of their loved ones. Additionally, a question asking them to score the impact of the diagnosis on daily life was added; participants were asked to score according to the Likert scale (very low, low, moderate, high, and very high). Scores of high and very high were analyzed as a high level of impact. To assess DAN and PTG, the validated PTG scale and Templer DAN scale were used [13]. The validity and reliability of the Turkish version have been tested by Senol et al. [14] and Akça et al. [15]. These studies demonstrated test–retest reliability of r = 0.86 (P < 0.001) and 0.79, respectively. The death anxiety scale consists of 15 items, self-report, and a 2 point Likert instrument. The statements are assessed as wrong and right and scored as 0 and 1, respectively. The sum of the 15 items results in a score ranging from 0–15. Scores ≥7 are defined as high DAN. Assessment of PTG was performed by PTG inventory [2]. The psychometric properties of the inventory have been tested in the Turkish population by Dirik et al. [16] and Kağan et al. [17]. Both analyses showed the validity and reliability of the test in Turkish individuals. The instrument includes 21 items rated on a 6 point Likert scale (0–5). The sum of the 21 items results in a score ranging 0–105. Higher scores mean positive psychological changes due to adverse life events. There are subscales of the inventory to evaluate growth in self-perception, philosophy of life, and changes in relationships. In the current analysis, the median score of the PTG scale (70.0) was used to group PTG into high and low.

2.1. Statistical analysis

Baseline characteristics of the patient group were described by using frequencies and proportions for dichotomous and categorical variables. Univariate analysis of the predictors of high DAN and PTG scores was performed by chi-square or Fisher exact tests. Parameters with a P-value less than 0.10 were further analyzed in multivariate analysis. Using a logistic regression model, several parameters were further tested for PTG in multivariate analysis. These included being a spouse, being over 40 years of age, being married, female sex, siblings, and high DAN scores. For DAN, caring for elderly patients, female sex, siblings, low income, not working, the presence of chronic disease, history of psychiatric admission, and high PTG scores were analyzed. The correlation between PTG and DAN was tested using the Pearson correlation coefficient. All analyses were performed using SPSS 17.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA), and P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

3. Results

Between August 2017 and April 2018, 426 participants were evaluated in 3 different cancer centers. The median age was 40.5 years (17–70), and 50.2% were female (Table 1); 58.9% were 1st-degree relatives, and 61.7% were living in the same house. One hundred ninety-five patients (45.8%) were more than 65 years of age, and most diagnoses were gastrointestinal (29.3%) and breast (23.9%) cancers (Table 2). Among the patients, 240 (56.3%) were under palliative chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Three hundred sixty-one participants (84.7%) declared that the diagnosis had a high level of impact on their daily lives. In addition, 26.1% of participants had a screening for malignancy after the diagnosis of their relative.

Table 1.

Characteristics of participants.

Characteristics n(%)
Age (median/range)
More than 40
40.5(17–70)
213(50.0)
Female 214(50.2)
Marital status
Married
Single/divorced

322(75.6)
104(24.4)
Children present 316(74.2)
Live in
City center
Town/village

287(67.4)
139(32.6)
Live in
Self contained house
Apartment

191(44.8)
235(55.2)
Monthly income
<1000 TL
1000–2000 TL
2000–4000 TL
>4000 TL
Low income (<2000 TL)

77(18.1)
146(34.3)
141(33.1)
62(14.6)
223(52.3)
Education
Illiterate/literate
More

33(7.7)
393(92.3)
Job
Retired
Working
Not working

50(11.7)
171(40.1)
205(48.2)
Chronic disease present 137(32.2)
History of psychiatry admission 82(19.2)
Degree of relationship
Spouse
1st degree
2nd degree
3rd degree

93(21.8)
249(58.9)
67(15.7)
17(4.0)
Living in the same house 263(61.7)

Table 2.

Patient characteristics.

Characteristics n(%)
Age (median/range) 63(19–86)
Diagnosis
Gastrointestinal cancer
Breast cancer
Lung cancer
Gynecological cancer
Prostate cancer
Others

125(29.3)
102(23.9)
61(14.3)
48(11.3)
40(9.4)
50(11.7)
Time to follow-up, months (median/range) 6 (1–274)
Disease status
Remission/follow up
Under adjuvant therapy
Palliativechemotherapy or radiotherapy
Palliative care

69(16.2)
79(18.5)
240(56.3)
38(8.9)

The median PTG score was 70.0 (5.0–105.0), and 210 (49.3%) participants had high level PTG scores according to our definition (PTG score ³70.0). In the univariate analysis, being the spouse of the patient, being over 40 years of age, female sex, being married, siblings, and high DAN scores were associated with high PTG scores (Table 3). In multivariate analysis, a high DAN score was the only parameter associated with high PTG scores [OR: 1.6, CI (95%) 1.02–2.5, P = 0.03] (Table 4). The median DAN score was 8.0 (1.0–14.0), and 311 (73%) participants had high level DAN scores according to our definition (DAN score ³7). Caring for elderly patients, female sex, siblings, low income, not working, and a history of psychiatric admission were associated with high DAN scores (Table 3). In multivariate analysis, female sex was the only risk factor for high DAN scores [OR: 1.6, CI (95%) 1.1–2.8, P = 0.049] (Table 4). There was a positive correlation between PTG and DAN scores (r = 0.15, P = 0.001). In addition, higher DAN scores were associated with a positive impact on self-perception (37.0 verus 35.0, P = 0.02), philosophy of life (16.0 versus 13.0, P = 0.035), and changes in relationship (16.0 versus 14.0, P = 0.01).

Table 3.

Factors associated with high PTG and DAN scores.

Characteristics High PTG score p High DAN score (n, %) p
(n, %) 85(49.4)
125(49.2)
0.52 129(75.0)
182(71.7)
0.25
Patient age, years
<65
<65

109(47.2)
101(51.8)
0.20
160(69.3)
151(77.4)
0.03
Disease status
Remission/follow-up
Under adjuvant therapy
Palliative chemotherapy or radiotherapy
Palliative care

37(53.6)
35(44.3)
115(47.9)
23(60.5)


0.33

49(71.0)
55(69.6)
180(75.0)
27(71.1)


0.76
Degree of relationship
Spouse
1st degree
2nd degree
3rd degree
Spouse
Other

55(59.1)
122(49.0)
26(38.8)
7(41.2)
55(59.1)
155(46.5)




0.07
0.021

73(78.5)
180(72.3)
44(65.7)
14(82.4)
73(78.5)
238(71.5)




0.25
0.11
Living in
Same house
Another house

127(48.3)
83(50.9)


0.33

189(71.9)
122(74.8)


0.28
Age of the participant
<40
<40

95(44.6)
115(54.0)


0.03

159(74.6)
152(71.4)


0.25
Sex
Female
Male

118(55.1)
92(43.4)


0.01

174(81.3)
137(64.6)


<0.001
Marital status
Married
Single/divorced

173(53.7)
37(35.6)


0.001

239(74.2)
72(69.2)


0.19
Sibling
Present
Absent

172(54.4)
38(34.5)


<0.001

240(75.9)
71(64.5)


0.01
Living in
City center
Town/village

141(49.1)
69(49.6)


0.50

206(71.8)
105(75.5)


0.24
Living in
Self contained house
Apartment

98(51.3)
112(47.7)


0.25

141(73.8)
170(72.3)


0.40
Monthly income
Low (<2000 TL)
High (>2000 TL)

116(52.0)
94(46.3)


0.14

172(77.1)
139(68.5)


0.02
Education
Illiterate/literate
More

17(51.5)
193(49.1)


0.46

27(81.8)
284(72.3)


0.16
Job
Retired
Working
Not working
Not working
Other


25(50.5)
77(45.0)
108(52.7)



0.33


31(62.0)
113(66.1)
167(81.5)
167(81.5)
144(65.3)



0.001

<0.001
Chronic disease
Present
Absent

68(49.6)
142(49.1)


0.50

106(77.4)
205(70.9)


0.09
Psychiatry admission
Present
Absent

39(47.6)
171(49.7)


0.41

66(80.5)
245(71.2)


0.05
DAN score
High
Low

165(53.1)
45(39.1)


0.007
PTG score
High
Low

173(78.6)
138(67.0)


0.005

PTG: Posttraumatic growth, DAN: Death anxiety

Table 4.

Multivariate analysis of factors associated with high PTG and DAN scores.

High PTG score High DAN score
Β(SE) OR CI (95%) P Β(SE) OR CI (95%) P
Being spouse 0.14(0.26) 1.1 0.6–1.9 0.57
>40 years of age 0.11(0.22) 1.1 0.7–1.7 0.60
Married 0.47(0.35) 1.6 0.8–3.2 0.11
Female sex 0.39(0.20) 1.4 0.9–2.2 0.055 0.52(0.27) 1.6 1.1–2.8 0.049
Having sibling 0.28(0.36) 1.3 0.6–2.7 0.43 0.41(0.26) 1.5 0.91– 2.52 0.10
High DAN score 0.48(0.23) 1.6 1.02–2.5 0.03
Caring elderly patients 0.36(0.23) 1.44 0.9–2.2 0.11
Low income 0.27(0.23) 1.31 0.8–2.0 0.24
Not working 0.45(0.27) 1.58 0.9–2.7 0.10
Chronic disease present 0.001(0.26) 1.001 0.5–1.6 0.99
Psychiatry admission 0.20(0.32) 1.2 0.6–2.3 0.52
High PTG score 0.41(0.23) 1.5 0.9–2.3 0.07

PTG: Posttraumatic growth, DAN: Death anxiety, SE: Standard error

4. Discussion

In this study, we tried to look at the positive impacts of a cancer diagnosis on CCPs and planned to analyze the predictors of PTG and DAN. We concluded that high DAN was associated with higher PTG scores, and the female sex was an important factor in death anxiety. We found a statistically significant correlation between PTG and DAN scores.

Trauma has always been a damaging experience, but recent literature concludes that trauma can also lead to positive changes, referred to as posttraumatic growth (PTG) [18]. The PTG model has been defined as follows: some people experience profound changes in their perceptions of themselves, relationships with others, or philosophy of life following their struggle with a major life crisis such as cancer [1]. In addition, PTG has been related to increased self-confidence, the ability to appreciate the present, increased emphasis on family, improved relationships, recognition of new possibilities, and religious growth [19,20]. Although the literature has mostly focused on PTG after the death of cancer patients, a diagnosis of cancer, treatment-related complications, and end of life issues are devastating traumas for CCPs. Female CCPs, older relatives, and those with religious beliefs were reported to have more PTG. Additionally, being the spouse of a cancer patient had positive impacts on spiritual changes [21]. Similar to our results, there are studies in which analysis of sex effects did not yield significant differences [22,23]. In our analysis, participants who were over 40, married, and had siblings were found to have higher PTG, but this was statistically insignificant in multivariate analysis. Balfe et al. studied PTG in caregivers of head and neck cancer patients and showed that increased social support, increasing time since diagnosis, increased worry about cancer, and increased financial stress were associated with more PTG [24]. Ho et al. reported more PTG among those with higher income levels. We could not find any effect of household income and time to follow-up.

Death anxiety originates from the fear of one’s own death and the dying process. Death anxiety is accepted as an important psychological phenomenon that can damage quality of life [9,10]. Caring for cancer patients may evoke thoughts and fears about personal mortality. Also, CCPs with DAN are prone to increased stress levels, depressive symptoms, and decreased quality of life [25,26]. Female gender and poverty have been associated with higher DAN [10, 27]. In addition, having children, changes in physical appearance, pain, low self-esteem, and physical symptoms have been associated with increased DAN [28] Consistent with the literature, we found that female sex is an important risk factor for increased DAN in CCPs.

There is limited data addressing whether DAN has a positive impact on our lives. However, as discussed by Irvin D. Yalom, once we confront our mortality, we are inspired to rearrange our priorities, communicate more deeply with those we love, appreciate more keenly the beauty of life, and increase our willingness to take the risks necessary for personal fulfillment. Facing death and overcoming the terror of death can make individuals stare at the sun [29]. Ens et al. reported a positive correlation between DAN and personal growth [30]. There is data supporting the negative effects of worrying about cancer and the fear of recurrence in CCPs [31,32] in terms of psychological morbidity and quality of life. Balfe et al. demonstrated a 7.2-fold increase in the benefit of PTG in CCPs suffering from worry about cancer [24]. Consistent with their data, we demonstrated a 1.6-fold increase in the benefit of PTG in CCPs with DAN. Consistent with our results, Gunst et al. demonstrated a positive impact deriving from fear of death on PTG in adolescent cancer patients [12]. The positive effects of DAN on PTG should be further studied. Religiosity and spirituality are important for coping with the psychological trauma caused by cancer [33]. The data about religious beliefs and DAN is limited. However, religious coping plays an important role for CCPs [10]. Bachner et al. found that religious CCPs experienced more DAN [34]. The association between DAN and PTG should be evaluated based on religiosity and spirituality.

This study has some inevitable limitations. Firstly, because it is a survey study, there is an unavoidable subjectivity. The population studied in 3 different cancer centers had a heterogeneous socioeconomic background. In addition, we included relatives up to the 3rd degree to evaluate the effects of close relations. However, studying a specific group of relatives can produce more specific results. The CCPs group was young, with a median age of 40. As a result there could be limitations to the analysis of age as the determinant of DAN and PTG.

In conclusion; in our study, the female sex was found to be an important risk factor for death anxiety. We found a positive impact of death anxiety on positive psychological changes in CCPs. This is the first indication of the association between DAN and PTG in CCPs. This association should be further studied, including spiritual experiences, religious perspectives, and family relations.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Hatice Burgaç, Ayşe Arıkanoğlu Soğancı, and Durdu Yaman for their contributions during data collection. No funding was received for this project.

Informed Consent

The study protocol received institutional review board approval (Çukurova University School of Medicine, Noninterventional Clinical Studies Review Board; date: 13/04/2018, meeting: 76, decision no: 39), and all participants provided informed consent in the format required by the relevant authorities and/or boards.

References

  1. Posttraumatic growth: conceptual foundations and empirical evidence. Conference Proceedings; 2004.
  2. Tedeschi RG Calhoun LG The Posttraumatic Growth Inventory: measuring the positive legacy of trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress . 1996;9:455–471. doi: 10.1007/BF02103658. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Luszczynska A Durawa AB Dudzinska M The effects of mortality reminders on posttraumatic growth and finding benefits among patients with life-threatening illness and their caregivers. Psychology & Health . u2d3e;27:1227–1243. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2012.665055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Positive changes among patients with advanced colorectal cancer and their family caregivers: a qualitative analysis. Psychology & Health . 2017;32:94–109. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2016.1247839. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Posttraumatic growth after breast cancer: Patient, partner, and couple perspectives. Psychosomatic Medicine . 2004;66:442–454. doi: 10.1097/01.psy.0000127689.38525.7d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Weiss T. Correlates of posttraumatic growth in husbands of breast cancer survivors. Psychooncology . 2004;13:260–268. doi: 10.1002/pon.735. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Tomer A Eliason G. Toward a comprehensive model of death anxiety. Death Studies . 1996;20:343–365. doi: 10.1080/07481189608252787. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Podolsky DK Pride and prejudice: inflammatory bowel disease models and drug development. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology . 2000;16:295–296. doi: 10.1097/00001574-200007000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Sherman DW Norman R McSherry CB A comparison of death anxiety and quality of life of patients with advanced cancer or AIDS and their family caregivers. Journal of Association of Nurses in AIDS Care . 2010;21:99–112. doi: 10.1016/j.jana.2009.07.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Death anxiety and quality of life in Iranian caregivers of patients with cancer. Cancer Nursing . 2017;40:u2d2f–u2d2f. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000355. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Zoellner T Maercker A Posttraumatic growth in clinical psychology-a critical review and introduction of a two component model. Clinical Psychology Review . 2006;26:626–653. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2006.01.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Gunst DC Kaatsch P Goldbeck L. Seeing the good in the bad: which factors are associated with posttraumatic growth in long-term survivors of adolescent cancer? Supportive Care in Cancer. 2016;24:4607–4615. doi: 10.1007/s00520-016-3303-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Templer DI The construction and validation of a Death Anxiety Scale. Journal of General Psychology . 1970;82:165–177. doi: 10.1080/00221309.1970.9920634. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Ankara İlinde Kurumlarda Yaşayan Yaşlılarda Ölüme İlişkin Kaygı ve Korkular. MSc . 1989.
  15. Akça F Köse A Ölüm Kaygısı Ölçeğinin Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Turkish Journal of Clinical Psychiatry . 2008;11:7–16. [Google Scholar]
  16. Dirik G Karanci AN Variables related to posttraumatic growth in Turkish rheumatoid arthritis patients. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings . 2008;15:193–203. doi: 10.1007/s10880-008-9115-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Kağan M Güleç M Boysan M Çavuş H Hierarchical factor structure of the Turkish version of the posttraumatic growth inventory in a normal population. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin . 2012;11:617–624. [Google Scholar]
  18. Posttraumatic growth in Iranian cancer patients. Indian Journal of Cancer . 2012;49:287–292. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.104489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Koop PM Strang VR The bereavement experience following home - based family caregiving for persons with advanced cancer. Clinical Nursing Research . 2003;12:127–144. doi: 10.1177/1054773803012002002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Kilmer RP. Clinical Psychology Review . 2011;31:949–964. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2011.06.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Examining posttraumatic growth among bereaved family members of patients with cancer who received palliative care at home. American Journal of Hospice & Palliat Medicine . 2018;35:u2d25–u2d25. doi: 10.1177/1049909117703358. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ho SM Chan CL Ho RT Posttraumatic growth in Chinese cancer survivors. Psychooncology . 2004;13:377–389. doi: 10.1002/pon.758. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Widows MR Jacobsen PB Booth-Jones M Predictors of posttraumatic growth following bone marrow transplantation for cancer. Health Psychology . u2d23;24:266–273. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.24.3.266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24.  O’ Sullivan E What factors are associated with posttraumatic growth in head and neck cancer carers. European Journal of Oncology Nursing . 2016;21:31–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2015.11.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Andrews SC Caregiver burden and symptom distress in people with cancer receiving hospice care. Oncology Nursing Forum . 2001;28:1469–1474. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Lambert SD Jones BL Girgis A Distressed partners and caregivers do not recover easily: adjustment trajectories among partners and caregivers of cancer survivors. Annals of Behavioral Medicine . u2d22;44:225–235. doi: 10.1007/s12160-012-9385-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Thorson JA Powell FC Personality, death anxiety, and gender. Bulletin of Psychonomic Society . 1993;31:589–590. [Google Scholar]
  28. Determinants of death anxiety in patients with advanced cancer. BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care . 2015;5:u2d1a–u2d1a. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2012-000420. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Staring at the Sun: Overcoming the Terror of Death 2008.
  30. Ens C Bond JB Death anxiety and personal growth in adolescents experiencing the death of a grandparent. Death Studies . 2005;29:171–178. doi: 10.1080/07481180590906192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Hodges LJ Humphris GM Fear of recurrence and psychological distress in head and neck cancer patients and their carers. Psycho-Oncology . 2009;18:841–848. doi: 10.1002/pon.1346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Handschel J Naujoks C Kubler NR Fear of recurrence significantly influences quality of life in oral cancer patients. Oral Oncology . u2d19;48:1276–1280. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2012.06.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Carone DA Barone DF A social cognitive perspective on religious beliefs: Their functions and impact on coping and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology Review . 2001;21:989–1003. doi: 10.1016/s0272-7358(00)00078-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey

RESOURCES