3.8 Article

The Relationship between Perception of Social Support and Fatigue in Patients with Cancer

Journal

IRANIAN JOURNAL OF NURSING AND MIDWIFERY RESEARCH
Volume 23, Issue 4, Pages 261-266

Publisher

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.4103/ijnmr.IJNMR_63_17

Keywords

Cancer; fatigue; Iran; social support

Categories

Funding

  1. Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Fatigue is one of the most common issues related to cancer. Social support has direct effects on health status and coping with illness. This study investigated the relationship between the perception of social support and fatigue in patients with cancer. Materials and Methods: This descriptive/correlational study was conducted in Omid Hospital in Isfahan, Iran in 2014. One hundred and twenty-five cancer patients receiving chemotherapy were included in the study. Study participants were selected using consecutive sampling. Data were collected using the Cancer Fatigue Scale (CFS), Perceived Social Support Scale, and a demographic characteristics questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive and analytical statistical tests in SPSS software. Results: Mean (SD) of patients' fatigue and perceived social support scores were 40.63 (11.59) out of 100 and 49.33 (7.85) out of 100, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient showed an inverse relationship between fatigue and social support, however, this relationship was not significant. Multiple regression test was used to detect which dimension of perceived social support was a better predictor of the reduction in fatigue score. This test showed that the best predictor was informational support (B = -0.35, p = 0.004). Conclusions: Results showed a negative relationship between fatigue and perceived social support in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Therefore, social support interventions can help reduce fatigue.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available