4.6 Article

Coping experiences of women in the different phases of breast cancer

Journal

SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER
Volume 30, Issue 1, Pages 197-206

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-06400-9

Keywords

Breast cancer; Coping behavior; Qualitative research; Survivorship; Social support

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that coping strategies for women with breast cancer evolve according to the meaning of the disease in different phases, as well as age and family income. Different age groups and income levels of women use different coping strategies at different stages, with social support playing a significant role in each phase.
Purpose To understand the evolution of coping among women diagnosed with breast cancer over time, and the effect of age and family income on coping. Method Using a phenomenological qualitative study, data was collected through semi-structured interviews with sixteen women in a hospital in Barcelona (Spain) between January 2018 and June 2019. An analysis of thematic content and discursive profile was carried out, assisted by the Nvivo v.12 program. Results Coping strategies change according to the meaning of breast cancer in each phase and the age and family income. In the acute phase, multiple coping strategies are identified, and this variety was more frequent among the young women in the study. In the extended phase, planning, distancing, and seeking social support become important. The latter used during treatment by older women in the study, regardless of family income. In the follow-up phase, distancing stands out, but also the search for social support among young women with fewer resources. Conclusions Coping with breast cancer evolves according to the meaning that the disease receives in each phase. In addition, the analysis by discursive profile shows how the social support context is also related to the coping strategies in each phase.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available