Ever since the rise of online support groups it has been presumed that there is an empowering effect from patients' participating in these groups, despite a lack of evidence to back up this assumption. In this study we explored if, and in which ways, patients feel empowered by participation. Additionally, we studied which empowering and disempowering processes occur as a result of taking part in these groups. To accomplish this aim, we interviewed 32 participants of online support groups. This analysis revealed the following empowering processes: exchanging information, encountering emotional support, finding recognition, sharing experiences, helping others, and amusement. Disempowering processes were mentioned far less often. Empowering outcomes mentioned were being better informed; feeling confident in the relationship with their physician, their treatment, and their social environment; improved acceptance of the disease; increased optimism and control; enhanced self-esteem and social well-being; and collective action. This article demonstrates that participation in online support groups can make a valuable contribution to the emergence of empowered patients.

No abstract

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Background Patients who visit online support groups benefit in various ways. Results of our earlier study indicated that participation in online support groups had a profound effect on the participants’ feelings of “being empowered.” However, most studies of online patient support groups have focused on the members of these groups who actively contribute by sending postings (posters). Thus far, little is known about the impact for “lurkers” (ie, those who do not actively participate by sending postings).Objective In the present study, we explored if lurkers in online patient support groups profit to the same extent as posters do.MethodsWe searched the Internet with the search engine Google to identify all Dutch online support groups for patients with breast cancer, fibromyalgia, and arthritis. Invitations to complete an online survey were sent out by the owners of 19 groups. In the online questionnaire, we asked questions about demographic and health characteristics, use of and satisfaction with the online support group, empowering processes, and empowering outcomes. The online questionnaire was completed by 528 individuals, of which 109 (21%) identified themselves as lurkers.Results Lurkers (mean age 47 years) were slightly older than active participants (mean age 43 years, P = .002), had a shorter disease history (time since diagnosis 3.7 years vs 5.4 years, P = .001), and reported lower mental well-being (SF 12 subscore 37.7 vs 40.5, P = .004). No significant differences were found in other demographic variables. Posters indicated visiting the online support groups significantly more often for social reasons, such as curiosity about how other members were doing, to enjoy themselves, as a part of their daily routine (all P < .001), and because other members expected them to be there (P = .003). Lurkers and posters did not differ in their information-related reasons for visiting the online support group. Lurkers were significantly less satisfied with the online support group compared to posters (P < .001). With regard to empowering processes such as “exchanging information” and “finding recognition,” lurkers scored significantly lower than posters. However, lurkers did not differ significantly from posters with regard to most empowering outcomes, such as “being better informed,” “feeling more confident in the relationship with their physician,” “improved acceptance of the disease,” “feeling more confident about the treatment,” “enhanced self-esteem,” and “increased optimism and control.” The exception was “enhanced social well-being,” which scored significantly lower for lurkers compared to posters (P < .001).Conclusion Our study revealed that participation in an online support group had the same profound effect on lurkers’ self-reported feelings of being empowered in several areas as it had on posters. Apparently, reading in itself is sufficient to profit from participation in an online patient support group.

The perceived need for supportive care including healthy lifestyle programs was high, and in general, cancer survivors had a positive attitude towards self-management and eHealth. Need and attitude were associated with sociodemographic and clinical variables and quality of life. Therefore, a tailored approach seems to be warranted to improve and innovate supportive care targeting cancer survivors.

Background The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of meaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors (MCGP-CS) to improve personal meaning, compared to supportive group psychotherapy (SGP) and care as usual (CAU). Methods A total of 170 cancer survivors were randomly assigned to one of the three study arms: MCGP-CS (n = 57), SGP (n = 56), CAU (n = 57). Primary outcome measure was Personal Meaning Profile (total score PMP). Secondary outcome measures were subscales of the PMP, psychological well-being (SPWB), posttraumatic growth (PTGI), mental adjustment to cancer (MAC), optimism (LOT-R), hopelessness (BHS), psychological distress (anxiety and depression, HADS), and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30). Outcome measures were assessed before randomization, post-intervention, after three and six months follow-up (FU). Results Linear mixed model analyses (intention-to-treat) showed significant differences between MCGP-CS, SGP and CAU on the total PMP score, and on (sub)scales of the PMP, SPWB, MAC, and HADS. Post-hoc analyses showed significantly stronger treatment effects of MCGP-CS compared to CAU on personal meaning (d=0.81), goal-orientedness (d=1.07), positive relations (d=0.59), purpose in life (d=0.69); fighting spirit (d=0.61) (post-intervention), helpless/hopeless (d=−0.87) (3 months FU); distress (d=−0.6) and depression (d=−0.38) (6 months FU). Significantly stronger effects of MCGP-CS compared to SGP were found on personal growth (d=0.57) (3 months FU), and environmental mastery (d=0.66) (6 months FU). Conclusions MCGP-CS is an effective intervention for cancer survivors to improve personal meaning, psychological well-being and mental adjustment to cancer in the short term, and to reduce psychological distress in the long run.

There is evidence for positive effects of eHealth on perceived support, knowledge, and information competence of cancer patients. For effects on other outcomes in cancer patients, findings are mainly inconsistent or lacking. This meta-review did not find relevant reviews focusing on or including the effects of eHealth on informal caregivers, which seems a rather unexplored area.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of an online self-management application (OncoKompas) among cancer survivors. In OncoKompas, cancer survivors can monitor their quality of life (QOL) via participant reported outcomes (PROs) (“Measure”), which is followed by automatically generated individually tailored feedback (“Learn”) and personalized advice on supportive care services (“Act”).MethodsA pretest–posttest design was used, conducting a survey before providing access to OncoKompas, and 2 weeks after, followed by an interview by a nurse. Adoption was defined as the percentage of cancer survivors that agreed to participate in the study and returned the T0 questionnaire. Implementation was defined as the percentage of participants that actually used OncoKompas as intended (T1). General satisfaction was assessed based on the mean score of three study-specific questions: (1) general impression of OncoKompas, (2) the user-friendliness, and (3) the ability to use OncoKompas without assistance (10-point Likert scales). Furthermore, satisfaction was measured with the Net Promotor Scale (NPS).ResultsOncoKompas was feasible with an adoption grade of 64 %, an implementation grade of 75–91 %, a mean satisfaction score of 7.3, and a positive NPS (1.9). Sociodemographic and clinical factors and QOL were not associated with satisfaction. Several facilitators and barriers related to the feasibility of OncoKompas were identified.ConclusionOncoKompas is considered feasible, but has to be further improved. In order to enhance feasibility and increase satisfaction, we have to balance the time it takes to use OncoKompas, measurement precision, and tailoring towards personalized advices.