Dataset Information

Experiences of Internet-Based Stepped Care in Individuals With Cancer and Concurrent Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression: Qualitative Exploration Conducted Alongside the U-CARE AdultCan Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Individuals with newly diagnosed cancer may experience impaired health in several aspects and often have a large need for information and support. About 30% will experience symptoms of anxiety and depression, with varying needs of knowledge and support. Despite this, many of these patients lack appropriate support. Internet-based support programs may offer a supplement to standard care services, but must be carefully explored from a user perspective. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to explore the participants' perceptions of the relevance and benefits of an internet-based stepped care program (iCAN-DO) targeting individuals with cancer and concurrent symptoms of anxiety and depression. METHODS:We performed a qualitative study with an inductive approach, in which we used semistructured questions to interview 15 individuals using iCAN-DO. We analyzed the interviews using content analysis. RESULTS:The analysis found 17 subcategories regarding the stepped care intervention, resulting in 4 categories. Participants described the need for information as large and looked upon finding information almost as a survival strategy when receiving the cancer diagnosis. iCAN-DO was seen as a useful, reliable source of information and support. It was used as a complement to standard care and as a means to inform next of kin. Increased knowledge was a foundation for continued processing of participants' own feelings. The optimal time to gain access to iCAN-DO would have been when being informed of the diagnosis. The most common denominator was feeling acknowledged and supported, but with a desire for further adaptation of the system to each individual's own situation and needs. CONCLUSIONS:Users saw the internet-based stepped care program as safe and reliable and used it as a complement to standard care. Similar interventions may gain from more personalized contents, being integrated into standard care, or using symptom tracking to adjust the contents. Offering this type of program close to diagnosis may provide benefits to users. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClincalTrials.gov NCT-01630681; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01630681.

SUBMITTER: Hauffman A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7154941 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Experiences of Internet-Based Stepped Care in Individuals With Cancer and Concurrent Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression: Qualitative Exploration Conducted Alongside the U-CARE AdultCan Randomized Controlled Trial.

Hauffman Anna A Alfonsson Sven S Igelström Helena H Johansson Birgitta B

Journal of medical Internet research 20200330 3

<h4>Background</h4>Individuals with newly diagnosed cancer may experience impaired health in several aspects and often have a large need for information and support. About 30% will experience symptoms of anxiety and depression, with varying needs of knowledge and support. Despite this, many of these patients lack appropriate support. Internet-based support programs may offer a supplement to standard care services, but must be carefully explored from a user perspective.<h4>Objective</h4>The purpo ...[more]

PMID: 32224483

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of an internet-based perioperative care programme compared with usual care for gynaecological patients. DESIGN:Economic evaluation from a societal perspective alongside a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial with 12 months of follow-up. SETTING:Secondary care, nine hospitals in the Netherlands, 2011-2014. PARTICIPANTS:433 employed women aged 18-65 years scheduled for a hysterectomy and/or laparoscopic adnexal surgery. INTERVENTION:The intervention comprised an internet-based care programme aimed at improving convalescence and preventing delayed return to work (RTW) following gynaecological surgery and was sequentially rolled out. Depending on the implementation phase of their hospital, patients were allocated to usual care (n=206) or to the intervention (n=227). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was duration until full sustainable RTW. Secondary outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), health-related quality of life and recovery. RESULTS:At 12 months, there were no statistically significant differences in total societal costs (€-647; 95%?CI €-2116 to €753) and duration until RTW (-4.1; 95%?CI -10.8 to 2.6) between groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for RTW was 56; each day earlier RTW in the intervention group was associated with cost savings of €56 compared with usual care. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.79 at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of €0 per day earlier RTW, which increased to 0.97 at a WTP of €76 per day earlier RTW. The difference in QALYs gained over 12 months between the groups was clinically irrelevant resulting in a low probability of cost-effectiveness for QALYs. CONCLUSIONS:Considering that on average the costs of a day of sickness absence are €230, the care programme is considered cost-effective in comparison with usual care for duration until sustainable RTW after gynaecological surgery for benign disease. Future research should indicate whether widespread implementation of this care programme has the potential to reduce societal costs associated with gynaecological surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NTR2933; Results.

Project description:Approximately 20-30% of patients with cancer experience a clinically relevant level of emotional distress in response to disease and treatment. This in itself is alarming but it is even more problematic because it is often difficult for physicians and nurses to identify cancer patients who experience clinically relevant levels of anxiety and depression symptoms. This can result in persistent distress and can cause human suffering as well as costs for individuals and to the community.Applying a multi-disciplinary and design-oriented approach aimed at attaining new evidence-based knowledge in basic and applied psychosocial oncology, this protocol will evaluate an intervention to be implemented in clinical practice to reduce cancer patient anxiety and depression. A prospective randomized design will be used.The overarching goal of the intervention is to promote psychosocial health among patients suffering from cancer by means of self-help programmes delivered via an Internet platform. Another goal is to reduce costs for individuals and society, caused by emotional distress in response to cancer.Following screening to detect levels of patient distress, patients will be randomized to standard care or a stepped care intervention. For patients randomized to the intervention, step 1 will consist of self-help material, a chat forum where participants will be able to communicate with each other, and a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section where they can ask questions and get answers from an expert. Patients in the intervention group who still report symptoms of anxiety or depression after access to step 1 will be offered step 2, which will consist of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) administered by a personal therapist. The primary end point of the study is patients' levels of anxiety and depression, evaluated longitudinally during and after the intervention.There is a lack of controlled studies of the psychological and behavioral processes involved in this type of intervention for anxiety and depressive disorders. Since anxiety and depressive symptoms are relatively common in patients with cancer and the availability of adequate support efforts is limited, there is a need to develop evidence-based stepped care for patients with cancer, to be delivered via the Internet.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01630681.

Project description:Collaborative care for depression is more effective in improving treatment outcomes than primary care physicians' (PCPs) usual care (UC). However, few trials of collaborative care have targeted anxiety.To examine the impact and 12-month durability of a centralized, telephone-delivered, stepped collaborative care intervention (CC) for treating anxiety disorders across a network of primary care practices.Randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessments.A total of 329 patients aged 18-64 referred by their PCPs in response to an electronic medical record (EMR) prompt. They include 250 highly anxious patients randomized to either CC or to UC, and 79 moderately anxious patients who were triaged to a watchful waiting (WW) cohort and later randomized if their conditions clinically deteriorated.Twelve months of telephone-delivered CC involving non-mental health professionals who provided patients with basic psycho-education, assessed preferences for guideline-based pharmacotherapy, monitored treatment responses, and informed PCPs of their patients' care preferences and progress via the EMR.Mental health-related quality of life ([HRQoL]; SF-36 MCS); secondary outcomes: anxiety (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale [SIGH-A], Panic Disorder Severity Scale) and mood (PHQ-9).At 12-month follow-up, highly anxious patients randomized to CC reported improved mental HRQoL (effect size [ES]: 0.38 [95 % CI: 0.13-0.63]; P?=?0.003), anxiety (SIGH-A ES: 0.30 [0.05-0.55]; P?=?0.02), and mood (ES: 0.45 [0.19-0.71] P?=?0.001) versus UC. These improvements were sustained for 12 months among African-Americans (ES: 0.70-1.14) and men (ES: 0.43-0.93). Of the 79 WW patients, 29 % met severity criteria for randomization, and regardless of treatment assignment, WW patients reported fewer anxiety and mood symptoms and better mental HRQoL over the full 24-month follow-up period than highly anxious patients who were randomized at baseline.Telephone-delivered, centralized, stepped CC improves mental HRQoL, anxiety and mood symptoms. These improvements were durable and particularly evident among those most anxious at baseline, and among African-Americans and men.

Project description:BackgroundInternet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (I-CBT) leads to a reduction of fatigue severity and disability in adults with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). However, not all patients profit and it remains unclear how I-CBT is best embedded in the care of CFS patients.ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the efficacy of stepped care, using therapist-assisted I-CBT, followed by face-to-face (f2f) cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) when needed, with f2f CBT (treatment as usual [TAU]) on fatigue severity. The secondary aim was to investigate treatment efficiency.MethodsA total of 363 CFS patients were randomized to 1 of the 3 treatment arms (n=121). There were 2 stepped care conditions that differed in the therapists' feedback during I-CBT: prescheduled or on-demand. When still severely fatigued or disabled after I-CBT, the patients were offered f2f CBT. Noninferiority of both stepped care conditions to TAU was tested using analysis of covariance. The primary outcome was fatigue severity (Checklist Individual Strength). Disabilities (Sickness Impact Profile -8), physical functioning (Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36), psychological distress (Symptom Checklist-90), and proportion of patients with clinically significant improvement in fatigue were the secondary outcomes. The amount of invested therapist time was compared between stepped care and TAU. Exploratory comparisons were made between the stepped care conditions of invested therapist time and proportion of patients who continued with f2f CBT.ResultsNoninferiority was indicated, as the upper boundary of the one-sided 98.75% CI of the difference in the change in fatigue severity between both forms of stepped care and TAU were below the noninferiority margin of 5.2 (4.25 and 3.81, respectively). The between-group differences on the secondary outcomes were also not significant (P=.11 to P=.79). Both stepped care formats required less therapist time than TAU (median 8 hours, 9 minutes and 7 hours, 25 minutes in stepped care vs 12 hours in TAU; P<.001). The difference in therapist time between both stepped care formats was not significant. Approximately half of the patients meeting step-up criteria for f2f CBT after I-CBT did not continue.ConclusionsStepped care, including I-CBT followed by f2f CBT when indicated, is noninferior to TAU of f2f CBT and requires less therapist time. I-CBT for CFS can be used as a first step in stepped care.Trial registrationNederlands Trial Register NTR4809; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4809 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/74SWkw1V5).

Dataset Information

Experiences of Internet-Based Stepped Care in Individuals With Cancer and Concurrent Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression: Qualitative Exploration Conducted Alongside the U-CARE AdultCan Randomized Controlled Trial.

Publications

Experiences of Internet-Based Stepped Care in Individuals With Cancer and Concurrent Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression: Qualitative Exploration Conducted Alongside the U-CARE AdultCan Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure