4.6 Article

Cancer-coping profile predicts long-term psychological functions and quality of life in cancer survivors

期刊

SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 933-941

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-018-4382-z

关键词

Cancer; Survivor; Coping; Trajectory; Psychosocial

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeCancer survivors experience significant psychosocial distress even after completion of cancer treatment. The association between cancer coping and cancer recovery is not well established. The present study investigated the cancer-coping profile and cancer outcomes in breast cancer survivors.MethodsA three-wave longitudinal study was conducted. In 2009 (wave 1), 248 breast cancer survivors completed a package of psychological inventories to evaluate cancer copying style, psychological distress, anxiety and depression, and quality of life. They received follow-up survey in 2012 (wave 2) and 2016 (wave 3). A latent profile analysis (LPA) was conducted among participants in wave 1 to identify cancer-coping class. Identified cancer-coping class was used to predict psychological and survival outcomes in waves 2 and 3.ResultsTwo cancer-coping classes were identified through LPA, namely adaptive cancer coping (class I; 52%) and maladaptive cancer coping (class II; 47.8%). Demographic and clinical factors did not differ significantly between the two classes. Subsequent analyses demonstrated that the cancer-coping style in wave 1 predicted the psychological symptoms and quality of life outcomes at the two follow-ups (waves 2 and 3). Survivors in the adaptive group (class I) exhibited lower cancer distress, anxiety and depression scores, and higher quality of life scores than those in the maladaptive group did. Cancer coping were not found to be significantly associated with cancer survival or recurrence.ConclusionsThe identified cancer-coping styles were predictive of the survivors' psychological symptoms, psychological well-being, and health-related quality of life but not cancer survival or recurrence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据