Objective: To assess whether a self-care toolkit (SCT) provided to breast cancer patients undergoing surgery could mitigate distress and lessen symptoms associated with surgery.Design: One hundred women with breast cancer, planning to undergo initial surgery, were randomly assigned to either one of two groups: treatment as usual (TAU; n = 49) or TAU with the addition of an SCT (n = 51). The SCT contained an MP3 player with audio-files of guided mind–body techniques (breathing, progressive muscle relaxation, meditation, guided imagery, and self-hypnosis) and acupressure antinausea wristbands. Anxiety, pain, nausea, sleep, fatigue, global health, and quality of life (QOL) were assessed using validated outcome measures. Two inflammatory blood markers (erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR] and C-reactive protein [CRP]) were measured serially. Data were collected at baseline (T1), immediately before surgery (T2), within 10 h postoperatively (T3), and ∼2 weeks postsurgery (T4).Settings: Numerous studies have shown that psychological distress associated with a cancer diagnosis can affect pain perception and QOL.Results: Between T1 and T4, there were significant between-group differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-57 scores of Pain Interference, Fatigue, and Satisfaction with Social Roles, favoring the SCT group compared with TAU (p = 0.005, p = 0.023, and p = 0.021, respectively). There was a significant mean change in Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) scores from T2 to T3, with the SCT group having significantly smaller increases in postoperative pain (p = 0.008) and in postoperative ESR (p = 0.0197) compared with the TAU group. Clinically significant reductions in anxiety occurred in the SCT group during the main intervention period.Conclusion: These results suggest that using the SCT in the perioperative period decreased pain perceptions, fatigue, and inflammatory cytokine secretion.

Approximately 1.1 million family members are primary caregivers to post 9/11 veterans. These military caregivers assume a role that requires a long-term commitment that may affect their own health status; however, the impact on health among military caregivers is underestimated and underrepresented. As part of a larger retrospective cohort study that aimed to assess the health-related outcomes of post 9/11 veterans with penetrating traumatic brain injury (pTBI), we examined the health impact of caregiving on caregivers. Caregivers (n = 66) of veterans with pTBI completed a survey that captured the veterans' and their own health-related outcomes. Surveys included veteran and caregiver sociodemographics, caregiver role, tasks, burden, and caregiver-reported measures of veterans' health and quality of life. The participants were spouses (58%) and parents (32%) providing full-time assistance for more than 5 yr (74%). In their caregiver role, they provided assistance with activities of daily living and emotional/social support. Forty-eight percent of these caregivers met the definition of experiencing clinically significant burden. Veterans with pTBI had other comorbidities (e.g., depression, cognitive dysfunction, and anger), which were associated with caregiver burden. The findings further confirm the impact of caregiving on health status of caregivers, specifically when assisting veterans with pTBI.

No abstract

More direct inclusion of informal caregivers (i.e., family, friends) in patients’ care will make care more patient- and family-centered and has the potential to improve overall quality of care for patients. We need to understand what potentially comprises “inclusive care” so that we can define what “inclusive care” is and develop targets for care quality metrics. We conducted a critical literature review to identify key components of “caregiver inclusion.” Focusing on extant literature from 2005 to 2017, 35 papers met inclusion criteria. Directed content analysis with constant comparison was used to identify major themes related to a concept of “inclusive care.” Our analysis indicates that “inclusive care” entails five components: clear definition of caregiver role, system level policies for inclusion, explicit involvement of caregiver, provider assessment of caregiver capability, and mutuality in caregiver–provider communication. We discuss the evidence behind these five components using the Donabedian health care quality conceptual model.