Efficacy of a Dyadic Cancer-related Communication Reinforcement Intervention
Cancer-related Communication Between Patients and Their Caregivers: A Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing the Efficacy of a Dyadic Communication Reinforcement Intervention (DCRI)
1 other identifier
interventional
64
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Background: To face cancer-related stress, patients and caregivers activate individual and dyadic coping responses. Opened communication, adequate involvement, reciprocal supportive roles, self-disclosure and responsiveness enhance dyadic coping. Nevertheless, little is known about the optimal content of dyadic interventions designed to improve dyadic communication. Methods: A randomized controlled trail was designed to assess the efficacy of a dyadic intervention centered on a cancer-related communication reinforcement. Patient-caregiver dyads are randomly assigned to either an intervention group or a waiting list group. Patients and caregivers complete self-reported scales that assessed emotional distress, individual coping, cancer-related dyadic communication frequency, satisfaction, self-efficacy and coping at baseline and post-treatment (intervention group), or 6 weeks after baseline (waiting list group). This dyadic communication reinforcement intervention (DCRI) consists of a weekly 4-session intervention. This intervention includes specific communication tasks aiming the improvement of some cancer-related dyadic communication competencies such as concerns disclosure and request for support. Discussion: DCRI would lead to improvements in cancer-related dyadic communication self-efficacy, cancer-related dyadic communication satisfaction and dyadic coping.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable cancer
Started Jul 2017
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
July 3, 2017
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
August 24, 2018
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
October 23, 2018
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
October 29, 2018
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
December 1, 2018
CompletedDecember 4, 2018
December 1, 2018
1.1 years
October 23, 2018
December 1, 2018
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (2)
Cancer-related dyadic communication
Cancer-related dyadic communication self-efficacy through a self-reported scale for patients and caregivers. The perceived dyadic communication self-efficacy was measured by a 6-dimension scale: Dyadic Communication Competencies. Each dimension is divided into 5 items. Subject has to rate each item on a 0-100 range (0 = not certain; 100 = absolutely certain) to report how he is certain to matser the communication competency. A total score (ranging 0-100) for each dimension is computed by making the mean of all item scores. A higher score reflects a higher perceived communication self-efficacy.
2 months
Dyadic coping
Cancer-related dyadic coping through a validated self-reported scale for patients and caregivers: Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI). It is composed of the following six different dimensions: stress communication, supportive dyadic coping, delegated dyadic coping, negative dyadic coping, common dyadic coping and evaluation of dyadic coping. The DCI has a 5-point Likert scale (1 = "Rarely"; 5 = "Very Frequently") and provides a total score (35-175) by summing all items. A higher score reflects a better dyadic coping.
2 months
Secondary Outcomes (1)
Emotional Distress
2 months
Study Arms (2)
DCRI program
EXPERIMENTALPatient-caregiver dyads will immediately attend the Dyadic communication reinforcement intervention. For both groups, first assessment time take place just after the enrollment, before the randomization. For this group, second assessment time take place 2 weeks post-intervention. Pre-post assessments consist in self-reported scales assessing emotional distress, individual coping, cancer-related dyadic communication frequency, satisfaction, self-efficacy and coping.
Waiting List
NO INTERVENTIONPatient-caregiver dyads are in a waiting condition for 6 weeks. They will attend the Intervention after the second assessment time if they want to. For both group, first assessment time take place just after the enrollment, before the randomization. For this group, second assessment time take place 6 weeks after first assessment time. First and second assessment consist in self-reported scales assessing emotional distress, individual coping, cancer-related dyadic communication frequency, satisfaction, self-efficacy and coping.
Interventions
Psycho-educative and behavioral intervention centered on cancer-related dyadic communication
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- To read and speak French
- To be aged 18 years old or more
You may not qualify if:
- Not be treated for a psychiatric disorder
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Hopital Erasme & Institut Jules Bordet
Brussels, 1000, Belgium
Related Publications (14)
Lee E, Roberts LJ. (2018). Between individual and family coping: a decade of theory and research on couples coping with health-related stress. Journal of Family Theory & Review 10: 141-164. doi: 10.1111/jftr.12252.
BACKGROUNDKayser K, Watson LE, Andrade JT. (2007). Cancer as a "We-disease": examining the process of coping from a relational perspective. Family Systems & Health 25(4): 404-418.
BACKGROUNDCandy B, Jones L, Drake R, Leurent B, King M. Interventions for supporting informal caregivers of patients in the terminal phase of a disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jun 15;(6):CD007617. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007617.pub2.
PMID: 21678368BACKGROUNDLi Q, Loke AY. A literature review on the mutual impact of the spousal caregiver-cancer patients dyads: 'communication', 'reciprocal influence', and 'caregiver-patient congruence'. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2014 Feb;18(1):58-65. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2013.09.003. Epub 2013 Oct 4.
PMID: 24100089BACKGROUNDSong L, Rini C, Ellis KR, Northouse LL. Appraisals, perceived dyadic communication, and quality of life over time among couples coping with prostate cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2016 Sep;24(9):3757-65. doi: 10.1007/s00520-016-3188-0. Epub 2016 Apr 2.
PMID: 27039207BACKGROUNDBadr H, Krebs P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions for couples coping with cancer. Psychooncology. 2013 Aug;22(8):1688-704. doi: 10.1002/pon.3200. Epub 2012 Oct 9.
PMID: 23045191BACKGROUNDWaldron EA, Janke EA, Bechtel CF, Ramirez M, Cohen A. A systematic review of psychosocial interventions to improve cancer caregiver quality of life. Psychooncology. 2013 Jun;22(6):1200-7. doi: 10.1002/pon.3118. Epub 2012 Jun 25.
PMID: 22729992BACKGROUNDManne SL, Ostroff JS, Norton TR, Fox K, Goldstein L, Grana G. Cancer-related relationship communication in couples coping with early stage breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2006 Mar;15(3):234-47. doi: 10.1002/pon.941.
PMID: 15926198BACKGROUNDNorthouse LL, Mood DW, Montie JE, Sandler HM, Forman JD, Hussain M, Pienta KJ, Smith DC, Sanda MG, Kershaw T. Living with prostate cancer: patients' and spouses' psychosocial status and quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Sep 20;25(27):4171-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.6503. Epub 2007 Jul 16.
PMID: 17635953BACKGROUNDKayser K, Scott J. (2008). Helping couples cope with women's cancer. New York : Springer.
BACKGROUNDManne S, Badr H, Zaider T, Nelson C, Kissane D. Cancer-related communication, relationship intimacy, and psychological distress among couples coping with localized prostate cancer. J Cancer Surviv. 2010 Mar;4(1):74-85. doi: 10.1007/s11764-009-0109-y. Epub 2009 Dec 6.
PMID: 19967408BACKGROUNDPorter LS, Keefe FJ, Baucom DH, Hurwitz H, Moser B, Patterson E, Kim HJ. Partner-assisted emotional disclosure for patients with gastrointestinal cancer: results from a randomized controlled trial. Cancer. 2009 Sep 15;115(18 Suppl):4326-38. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24578.
PMID: 19731357BACKGROUNDPorter LS, Keefe FJ, Baucom DH, Hurwitz H, Moser B, Patterson E, Kim HJ. Partner-assisted emotional disclosure for patients with GI cancer: 8-week follow-up and processes associated with change. Support Care Cancer. 2012 Aug;20(8):1755-62. doi: 10.1007/s00520-011-1272-z. Epub 2011 Sep 24.
PMID: 21947440BACKGROUNDTiete J, Delvaux N, Lienard A, Razavi D. Efficacy of a dyadic intervention to improve communication between patients with cancer and their caregivers: A randomized pilot trial. Patient Educ Couns. 2021 Mar;104(3):563-570. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.08.024. Epub 2020 Aug 27.
PMID: 33129628DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Darius Razavi, MD, PhD
Université Libre de Bruxelles
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- QUADRUPLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, CARE PROVIDER, INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Masking Details
- Randomization allocation is given only at the data manager. Participant, care provider and assessor do not know in which group participants are allocated
- Purpose
- SUPPORTIVE CARE
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Prof.
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
October 23, 2018
First Posted
October 29, 2018
Study Start
July 3, 2017
Primary Completion
August 24, 2018
Study Completion
December 1, 2018
Last Updated
December 4, 2018
Record last verified: 2018-12