Our findings suggest that psychological distress in lung cancer patients can be effectively treated with MBSR. No effect was found in partners, possibly because they were more focused on patients' well-being rather than their own.
Background:Lung cancer patients and partners show high rates of impaired quality of life and heightened distress levels. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction has proven to be effective in reducing psychological distress in cancer patients. However, studies barely included lung cancer patients.Aim:We examined whether Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction might be a feasible and effective intervention for patients with lung cancer and partners.Design:Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction is a training in which mindfulness practices are combined with psycho-education to help participants cope with distress. In this mixed methods pilot study, questionnaires on psychological distress and quality of life were administered before, directly after and 3 months after the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction training, in combination with semi-structured interviews.Setting/participants:Patients with lung cancer and partners were recruited at one tertiary care academic medical centre. A total of 19 lung cancer patients and 16 partners participated in the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction training.Results:Most patients were diagnosed with advanced stage lung cancer. Vast majority completed the training. Those receiving anti-cancer treatment did not miss more sessions than patients who were not currently treated. Patients and partners felt positive about participating in a peer group and with their partner. Among participants no significant changes were found in psychological distress. Caregiver burden in partners decreased significantly after following Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction. The qualitative analysis showed that the training seemed to instigate a process of change in participants.Conclusion:The Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction training seemed to be feasible for patients with lung cancer and their partners. A randomized controlled trial is needed to examine the effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction in reducing psychological distress in lung cancer patients and partners.
Adding beclomethasone, 800 micrograms daily, slowed the unfavorable course of asthma or COPD seen with bronchodilator therapy alone. This effect was most evident in asthmatic patients.
Turbuhaler and Salbutamol-Diskus produce therapeutic doses at peak inspiratory flow (PIF) of >30 L/min. However, the optimum flow for Fluticasone-Diskus and Turbuhaler, in terms of total emitted dose and fine particle mass, is >60 L/min. The Turbuhaler achieved a higher output at this flow, as compared to Diskus. For pMDI 25 < PIF < 90 L/min, an actuation time of 0.0-0.2 sec is optimal. The aim of this study was to examine the incidence of optimum inhalation profiles, the effect of instruction, reproducibility, and the relationship between inhalation profiles and patient characteristics in stable asthmatics and mild/moderate/severe COPD patients. For each device, triplicate inhalation profiles were recorded during 6 sessions in a 10-week period. All patients achieved PIF > 30 L/min using Diskus. After instruction, all Diskus inhalations were performed with >60 L/min, except 7% of the inhalations of the severe COPD patients. At least 95% of the Turbuhaler inhalations was also performed with the minimum flow; however, 19% of the inhalations of the severe COPD patients were not optimally performed. The hand-lung coordination was inadequate in 40% of pMDI inhalation profiles, and 80% was performed with a too high flow. The reproducibility of PIF of both dry powder inhalers (DPIs) was very high (coefficient of variation = 4-10%). The reproducibility of the pMDI variables was lower (coefficient of variation = 9-18%). The major lung function variables predictive for PIF(diskus) and PIF(turbuhaler) were maximal inspiratory mouth pressure (MIP), PIF, and inspiratory capacity. No significant predictive lung function variables for PIF(pMDI) were found. Most patients performed reproducible optimum inhalation profiles through Diskus and Turbuhaler. However, in the severe COPD group, 7-19% of the patients were not able to generate the optimum flows through the DPIs. For these patients, a flow-independent aerosol delivery system might be more suitable. The majority of patients were using the pMDI incorrectly. Instruction had no effect. So, we concluded that the pMDI should not be used in these patient groups because of the coordination problems.
Purpose To compose a battery of instruments that provides a detailed assessment of health status (HS) in COPD but that is applicable and clinically meaningful in routine care. Methods In a previous study, we developed the Nijmegen Integral Assessment Framework (NIAF) that organizes existing tests and instruments by the sub-domains of HS they measure. Based on clinical and statistical criteria (correlation coefficients and Cronbach alpha's) we selected for each sub-domain instruments from the NIAF. A COPDstudy group was used to determine c-scores, and two control groups were used to determine the score ranges indicating normal functioning versus clinically relevant problems for each sub-domain. Existing questionnaire completion software (TestOrganiser) was adapted to enhance clinical applicability. Results The NCSI measures eleven sub-domains of physiological functioning, symptoms, functional impairment, and quality of life. The TestOrganiser automatically processes the data and produces the graphical PatientProfileChart, which helps to easily interpret results. This envisages the problem areas and discrepancies between the different sub-domains.
ConclusionThe NCSI provides a valid and detailed picture of a patient's HS within 15-25 min. In combination with the PatientProfileChart, the NCSI can be used perfectly in routine care as screening instrument and as a guide in patient-tailored treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.