4.7 Article

Child maltreatment and breast cancer survivors: Social support makes a difference for quality of life, fatigue and cancer stress

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 48, Issue 5, Pages 728-736

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.06.022

Keywords

Psycho-oncology; Childhood trauma; Support; Cancer survivorship; Close relationships

Categories

Funding

  1. NIH [R01CA126857, R01CA131029]
  2. NCRR [UL1RR025755]
  3. Ohio State Comprehensive Cancer Center [CA16058]
  4. American Cancer Society [PF-11-007-01-CPPB]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To identify how child maltreatment is associated with quality of life (QOL) among breast cancer survivors. Patients and methods: One hundred and thirty two women who had completed treatment for stage 0-IIIA breast cancer within the past 2 years (except for tamoxifen/aromatase inhibitors) and were at least 2 months post surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy completed questionnaires including the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, the Impact of Events Scale, the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form (MFSI-SF) and the Fact-B breast cancer quality of life questionnaire. Results: Women who were abused or neglected as children reported more cancer-related psychological distress, more fatigue and poorer physical, emotional, functional and breast cancer-specific well-being after treatment. These relations were partially explained by the fact that breast cancer survivors reported receiving less support as adults. Conclusion: The findings suggest that child maltreatment is an important predictor of QOL among breast cancer survivors. One reason why this association exists is because those who are maltreated as children report less support as adults. A better understanding of how child maltreatment contributes to breast cancer survivor QOL will help in tailoring and, therefore, enhancing the efficacy of interventions aimed at improving QOL. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available