Comparison of Psychosocial Outcomes in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Receiving a Coping Strategies Intervention and Control Subjects Receiving No Intervention

Vilela, Larissa D.D.; Nicolau, Bélinda; Mahmud, Salaheddin M.; Edgar, Linda; Hier, Michael P.; Black, Martin J.; Franco, Eduardo L.

doi:10.2310/7070.2005.5002

Cited by 37 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, no study found significant effects across all outcomes. Effect sizes could be calculated for outcomes from four studies [35,[37][38][39][40][41]. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals included zero in all cases except one study of a combined intervention where ESs≥0.2 corroborated statistically significant results on two measures of anxiety [38]; statistically significant results for depression and mood in this study were not supported by ESs.…”

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Six out of the nine studies reported at least one statistically or clinically significant benefit for the intervention versus control group [36][37][38][39][40][41][42]44]. However, no study found significant effects across all outcomes.…”

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only nine At 1 year f/up, number in intervention group scoring >7* on either HADS-A or HADS-D=1 (13%) compared with 6 (24%) controls. At baseline, 6 (75%) in the intervention group scored >7 compared with 6 (24%) controls [35-41, 43, 44], two of which were RCTs [37,43] and three of which included samples of >100 patients [35,[39][40][41]43]. This situation can be contrasted with burgeoning evidence in the field of breast cancer where 34 RCTs were published between 1980 and 2004, 19 of which involved >100 patients [45].…”

Section: Summary Of the Evidencementioning

confidence: 94%

“…Adherence was reported for only two interventions and was good in one [35] but poor in the second [36]. Attrition on outcome measures was ≤20% in all but two [35,36] of the eight studies that used pre-and post-measures [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43].…”

Section: Risk Of Bias Within Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evidence for interventions to improve psychological outcomes in people with head and neck cancer: a systematic review of the literature

Luckett

Britton

Clover

et al. 2011

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research to date suggests it is feasible to recruit people with HNC to psychological interventions and to evaluate their progress through repeated-outcome measures. Evidence for interventions is limited by the small number of studies, methodological problems, and poor comparability. Future interventions should target HNC patients who screen positive for clinical distress and be integrated into standard care.

show abstract

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Summary Of the Evidencementioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Risk Of Bias Within Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evidence for interventions to improve psychological outcomes in people with head and neck cancer: a systematic review of the literature

Luckett

Britton

Clover

et al. 2011

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tere are many studies supporting the use of cognitive and behavioral therapy (CBT) for chronic pain management; 68 however, results are mixed for the efectiveness of CBT in cancer-related pain. 69,70 Acupuncture, therapeutic massage and exercise can also be efective in managing all types of cancer-related pain. 71,72 Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, topical heat, and ice therapy are other topical therapies that can provide pain relief with few adverse efects.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cancer-related pain management in clinical oncology

Cipta¹,

Pietras²,

Weiss³

et al. 2015

J Community Support Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uncontrolled pain is one of the most feared and debilitating symptoms among cancer patients, and many suffer unnecessarily from suboptimal pain control. Cancer-related pain is often multidimensional and can affect all aspects of a patient's life. Hence, achieving adequate pain relief among cancer patients involves a proper assessment of psychosocial, spiritual, and physical pain issues, matched with an individualized treatment plan involving pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and procedural therapies when appropriate. Providing effective pain relief can help ease the overall burden of disease among oncology patients while helping them tolerate cancer-directed therapies and achieve the most optimal quality of life throughout all phases of the disease continuum. In this review, the authors will discuss the syndromes, assessment of, and treatment for cancer-related pain in the outpatient setting.

show abstract