MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4321438601 · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2023.02.009

A Comprehensive 6-mo Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program Decreases Psychological Distress Among Men Undergoing Curative Prostate Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2023· article· en· W4321438601 sur OpenAlexaffabout
G. Ilie, Ricardo Rendon, Ross Mason, Cody MacDonald, Michael Jonathan Kucharczyk, Nikhilesh Patil, David Bowes, Greg Bailly, David Bell, Joseph Lawen, Michael Ha, Derek Wilke, Peter Massaro, Jeffery Zahavich, George Kephart, Robert David Harold Rutledge

Notice bibliographique

RevueEuropean Urology · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCancer survivorship and care
Établissements canadiensDalhousie University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineRandomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)Prostate cancerDistressPhysical therapyAnxietySocial supportCancerInternal medicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyNursingPsychologyPsychotherapist

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although survival rates for newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients are very high, most of them will likely suffer significant treatment-related side effects, depression, or anxiety, affecting their quality of life. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the effects of a 6-mo online home-based physical, mental, and social support intervention, the Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (PC-PEP), on preventing psychological distress among men undergoing curative prostate cancer treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a crossover randomized clinical trial of 128 men aged 50-82 yr scheduled for curative prostate cancer surgery or radiotherapy (± hormone treatment), 66 received the 6-mo PC-PEP intervention and 62 were randomized to a waitlist-control arm and received the standard of care for 6 mo, and then PC-PEP to the end of the year. The PC-PEP intervention consisted of daily e-mails with video instructions providing education, patient activation, and empowerment on healthy living including physical and mental health, dietary recommendations, social support, physical and pelvic floor fitness, stress reduction using a biofeedback device, social connection and intimacy, and social support. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was nonspecific psychological distress (clinical cutoff ≥20) measured at baseline, and at 6 and 12 mo using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: At 6 mo, patients in the waitlist-control group had 3.59 (95% confidence interval: 1.12-11.51) times higher odds for nonspecific psychological distress and need for psychological treatment than men who received the PC-PEP intervention. At 12 mo, the wait-list control group that received the intervention at 6 mo had higher psychological distress than the early group. CONCLUSIONS: PC-PEP delivered early following diagnosis significantly prevented the burden of psychological distress in men undergoing curative prostate cancer treatment compared with standard of care, or late (6 mo later) intervention. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the effectiveness of a program (Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program: PC-PEP) developed with patients' engagement on the mental distress of patients awaiting curative treatment for their prostate cancer. The PC-PEP program lasted for 6 mo, and it prescribed, described, and demonstrated daily aerobic and strength training, kegels (pelvic floor training to help with urinary and sexual function), dietary changes that have been shown to be helpful in the prevention of prostate cancer and prostate cancer progression, stress reduction using a biofeedback device, as well as social and emotional support. All patients in the PC-PEP program were invited to a monthly video conference with the leads of the program who appeared in the 6 mo of daily videos prescribing the activities the patients were asked to watch and follow. The leads were a prostate cancer oncologist and a scientist in prostate cancer quality of life research. Half of the patients in this study received PC-PEP daily for the first 6 mo and were re-assessed at the end of the year. The other half received standard of care for 6 month and then received the intervention to the end of the year. The results of the study show that, at 6 mo, this intervention was effective at reducing the mental distress that accompanies a prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment compared with the standard of care. Mental distress was significantly reduced when the intervention was received early, compared with that received late (6 mo after scheduled curative treatment). We conclude that multi-faceted patient education and empowerment programming of this kind that is developed with patient engagement from the start is crucial to the care of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer and should be implemented in the standard of care. While treatment for prostate cancer is highly successful, side effects that accompany most treatments significantly affect the quality of life of patients. Here, we describe PC-PEP, a patient education and activation program that is cost effective, highly enforced by patients, and successful at reducing the impact of prostate cancer active treatment-related side effects on their psychological state. To learn more about this project, please visit www.pcpep.org. The program is now being tested in a phase 4 implementation trial throughout Canada and internationally (New Zealand), and is being expanded and tested for other types of cancer.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,219
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,053
Tête enseignante GPT0,394
Écart entre enseignants0,341 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations42
Publié2023
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEuropean UrologyMême sujetCancer survivorship and careTravaux en français237 207