Effect of occupation-based interventions in patients with haematopoietic malignancies undergoing chemotherapy: A pilot randomised controlled trial

Abstract

Background/objectiveChemotherapy for cancer negatively affects activities of daily living and quality of life. This study aimed to validate and compare the efficacy of two different interventions in patients with haematopoietic malignancies undergoing chemotherapy: (1) occupation-based interventions, designed using the Aid for Decision-making in Occupation Choice (ADOC) (an iPAD application) and (2) impairment-based interventions. ADOC helps promote decision-making during activities and participation in occupation-based goal setting. The impairment-based intervention group served as the comparison group and underwent impairment-based interventions focusing on dysfunction.MethodsIn this single-blinded pilot randomised controlled trial, 19 participants received an occupation-based intervention (n = 9) or an impairment-based intervention (n = 10). The treatment period comprised two sessions. Recruitment, compliance and outcome completion rates were calculated for the study. Effect sizes were examined for outcomes regarding physical performance, instrumental activities of daily living and quality of life as evaluated by a blinded assessor.ResultsIn this study, 24.8% (28/113) of the eligible patients with haematopoietic malignancies were enrolled, and 67.9% (19/28) of these were retained up to the post-assessment stage. Recruitment (25%) and compliance (68%) rates were satisfactory. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General emotional well-being and total scores were significantly higher for the occupation-based intervention group than for the impairment-based intervention group (both p < 0.05; d = 0.54, d = 0.51, respectively). Other outcomes showed no significant differences.ConclusionOccupation-based interventions designed using the ADOC application were useful for patients with haematopoietic malignancies.

Life Goal Domains, Traits, and Setting Process in the Collaboration between Healthcare Professionals and Cancer Survivors: A Scoping Review

“…1 ). 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 )…”

“…52) In particular, it is estimated that the presence or absence of patient education in the goalsetting process influences the ability to set achievable and relevant goals. In this study, however, achievable goals were set in five of the eight papers (62.5%) 22,25,31,32,37) that did not address patient education and in 10 of the 16 papers (62.5 %) 20,21,26,28,29,35,38,39,41,42) that did address patient education, meaning that relative dominance of these approaches were the same. Relevant goals were also set in all eight papers (100%) [22][23][24][25][31][32][33]37) that did not address patient education and in 14 of the 16 papers (87.5%) 20,21,[26][27][28]30,[34][35][36]38,39,[41][42][43] that addressed patient education, giving similar relative dominance for these approaches.…”

“…In this study, however, achievable goals were set in five of the eight papers (62.5%) 22,25,31,32,37) that did not address patient education and in 10 of the 16 papers (62.5 %) 20,21,26,28,29,35,38,39,41,42) that did address patient education, meaning that relative dominance of these approaches were the same. Relevant goals were also set in all eight papers (100%) [22][23][24][25][31][32][33]37) that did not address patient education and in 14 of the 16 papers (87.5%) 20,21,[26][27][28]30,[34][35][36]38,39,[41][42][43] that addressed patient education, giving similar relative dominance for these approaches. Therefore, the presence or absence of patient education did not appear to influence the abilities of cancer survivors and healthcare profession- In considering the importance of evaluating progress, it is notable that the previous systematic review 49) focused on the level of active engagement in rehabilitation goalsetting interventions, whereas the current scoping review focuses on life goals.…”