1 / 25

Dr Sahil Suleman Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust & Institute of Psychiatry

Dr Sahil Suleman Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust & Institute of Psychiatry. Cognitive and behavioural Factors associated with fatigue and disability in women with breast cancer. CANCER. Increasingly viewed as an LTC  Survivorship =  Symptoms & Side Effects from treatment Pain

gaston
Download Presentation

Dr Sahil Suleman Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust & Institute of Psychiatry

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Dr Sahil Suleman Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust & Institute of Psychiatry Cognitive and behavioural Factors associated with fatigue and disability in women with breast cancer

  2. CANCER • Increasingly viewed as an LTC • Survivorship = Symptoms & Side Effects from treatment • Pain • Swelling • Lymphoedema • Hair Loss • Dry mouth • Infection • Cognitive Impairment • Nausea • Hormonal Changes • FATIGUE

  3. “CANCER-RELATED FATIGUE” (CRF) • “a distressing, persistent, subjective sense of physical, emotional, and/or cognitive tiredness, or exhaustion related to cancer or cancer treatment that is not proportional to recent activity and interferes with usual functioning” National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2011) • Lack of consensus over definition • ICD-10 Criteria for Cancer Related Fatigue Syndrome

  4. WHY FOCUS ON CANCER-RELATED FATIGUE? • 39% - 90+% of those in treatment (Prue et al., 2006) • Significant impact on the ability to function and quality of life • Most important and distressing symptom (Curt et al., 2000) • Curt (2000) - Prevented “normal life” (91%) and changed daily routine (88%) • Carers – for 65%, fatigue had resulted in partners having taken at least one day (and a mean of four and a half days) off work (Curt, 2000)

  5. UNIQUENESS OF CANCER-RELATED FATIGUE EXPERIENCE VS. FATIGUE • More severe and distressing than fatigue (Andrykowski et al., 2010; Jacobsen et al., 1999) • Less frequently relieved by adequate sleep or rest than fatigue (Poulson, 2001; Stone et al., 1999)

  6. FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH CANCER-RELATED FATIGUE • Disease-related • Treatment-related • Other Physiological Markers • Demographic • Behavioural & Symptom • Psychological • Found to supersede physiological and demographic data in their ability to predict CRF (Hwang et al., 2003)

  7. PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH CANCER-RELATED FATIGUE • Depression & Anxiety • Personality Traits • Trait Anxiety • Neuroticism • Extraversion • Maladaptive Coping Styles • Higher order coping styles • Beliefs/Cognitions about experience and management of CRF

  8. INTERVENTIONS TARGETING CANCER-RELATED FATIGUE • Pharmacological • Exercise & Activity • Complementary & Lifestyle • Psychological • Wider Psychosocial Approaches • education, social support, relaxation, self-care • Cognitive Behavioural Approaches

  9. SO WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE US… • Range of factors contributing to CRF • Psychological factors are important • Targeting psychological factors has been successful in reducing CRF • CBT works in CFS • CBT works for other physical health conditions and for specific symptoms • Limited evidence that CBT works in CRF… • But how/why does it work?

  10. SULEMAN, S., RIMES, K. & CHALDER, T. (2011) • Cross-sectional investigation of the role of range of psychological variables in a sample of women undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer • Relationship between these variables and Fatigue and Functional Impairment • Also considered demographic and clinical variables • Prospective exploratory investigation of the role of psychological (and other) variables identified at commencement of chemotherapy in predicting Fatigue and Functional Impairment after 3 cycles of chemotherapy

  11. METHODOLOGY • Questionnaire Study • 100 Female Patients from Breast Care Clinic at King’s College Hospital, London • 3 groups - pre-chemotherapy, in chemotherapy or post-chemotherapy • 33 pre-chemotherapy participants followed up after 3 cycles of chemotherapy • FEC-T Chemotherapy Regimen

  12. MEASURES • Fatigue - Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire (Chalder et al., 1993) & Visual Analogue Scale – Fatigue (VAS-F) • Physical Functioning - European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30, Version 3 (EORTC QLQ-C30; Aaronson et al., 1993) • Social Functioning - Work and Social Adjustment Scale (Marks, 1986) • Cognitive and Behavioural Responses to Symptoms Questionnaire (CBRSQ; Moss-Morris et al., in preparation) • Beliefs about Emotions Scale (BES; Rimes & Chalder, 2010) • West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory – Part II - Significant Other Response Scales (WHYMPI; Kerns et al., 1985) • Short Health Anxiety Inventory - Retrospective (SHAI-R; Salkovskis et al., 2002) • Very Short Health Anxiety Inventory (Salkovskis, correspondence) • Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS; Zigmond & Snaith, 1983) • State Trait Anxiety Inventory – Trait (STAI-T; Spielberger et al., 1970) • Jenkins Sleep Scale (Jenkins et al., 1988) • Visual Analogue Scale – Expected Fatigue (VAS-E) • Cancer-specific Cognitions (exploratory) • Use of Coping Strategies (exploratory) • Demographic & Clinical Information

  13. MEASURES (CONTINUED) • Cognitive and Behavioural Responses to Symptoms Questionnaire • 6 subscales • catastrophising, symptom-focusing, fear avoidance, embarrassment avoidance, avoidance behaviour, all-or-nothing behaviour • 1 new scale – ‘embarrassment avoidance (cancer-related)’ • Beliefs about Emotions Scale • West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory – Part II - Significant Other Response Scales • Perceived punishing, distracting and over-solicitous responses

  14. PRELIMINARY RESULTS • Comparison between sample and population norms (Fayers et al., 2001; Loge et al., 1998) • Comparison of 3 groups – One way ANOVA • No difference between pre-chemotherapy, in chemotherapy and post-chemotherapy groups on fatigue, social adjustment or physical functioning scores • Treated as 1 group for subsequent analyses

  15. CROSS-SECTIONAL CORRELATIONS Significance * = .05 level ** = .01 level *** = .001 level

  16. CROSS-SECTIONAL CORRELATIONS (CONT’D) Significance * = .05 level ** = .01 level *** = .001 level

  17. CROSS-SECTIONAL CORRELATIONS (CONT’D) • Point bi-serial correlations of dichotomised demographic and clinical variables OR Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients • No significant correlations found for age, having sought help for other psychiatric problems, 5 comorbidity variables and 6 medication variables Significance * = .05 level ** = .01 level *** = .001 level

  18. CROSS-SECTIONAL PREDICTORS – MULTIPLE REGRESSION • Psychological Predictors - Hierarchical stepwise multiple regression • Step 1 – cognitive behavioural variables • Step 2 – wider psychological and behavioural variables • Psychological & Demographic/Clinical Predictors - Hierarchical forced entry multiple regression • Step 1 – demographic/clinical variables • Step 2 – psychological predictors from previous model

  19. CROSS-SECTIONAL PREDICTORS OF FATIGUE • Demographic / Clinical predictors in final model • Further education vs. no further education • Help sought for fatigue previously • Exploratory predictors • Expectation of future fatigue

  20. CROSS-SECTIONAL PREDICTORS OF SOCIAL ADJUSTMENT • Demographic / Clinical predictors in final model • White vs. non-white • Help sought for fatigue previously • Exploratory predictors • Expectation of future fatigue (minimally significant)

  21. CROSS-SECTIONAL PREDICTORS OF PHYSICAL FUNCTIONING • Demographic / Clinical predictors in final model • Further education vs. no further education • White vs. non-white • Working vs. not working • Help sought for fatigue previously • Exploratory predictors • Expectation of future fatigue

  22. PROSPECTIVE PREDICTORS – AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS

  23. KEY FINDINGS • More detailed picture of cognitions, behaviours and other psychological factors playing a part in CRF • Beyond umbrella terms e.g. ‘depression’ • Preliminary evidence of presence of maladaptive cognitions and behaviours prior to chemotherapy impacting on CRF over course of chemotherapy i.e. predictive role • Corroborates evidence from chronic fatigue syndrome and comparable health conditions • Wide range of patterns of cognition and behaviour • Unique aspects of CRF e.g. embarrassment avoidance (cancer-related), perceived punishing responses of significant others • Preliminary evidence for psychometric properties of new ‘embarrassment avoidance (cancer-related)’ scale

  24. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS • Development of targeted CBT interventions for CRF • Particular prominence to cognitive and behavioural aspects of avoidance behaviour and embarrassment avoidance in cancer • Screening and early intervention • Informing staff and validating patients • Carers • Staff training • Stepped care approach • Limitations • Future Research

  25. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING

More Related