Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prostate cancer peer navigation: an observational study on navigators’ well-being, benefit finding, and program satisfaction

  • Research
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The study investigated peer and caregiver navigators’ motivations for providing support, i.e., benefit finding, their mental and physical health, and program satisfaction.

Methods

A web-based peer navigation program was conducted for prostate cancer patients and caregivers over a 6-month time period. In a one-arm observational study, peer and caregiver navigators were asked to complete standardized mental health (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cancer Worry Scale), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, EQ-VAS), and social support (ENRICHD Social Support Instrument) scales pre- and post-intervention and questionnaires addressing motivations, benefits, and program satisfaction post-intervention.

Results

Both peer and caregiver navigators reported very low anxiety and depressive symptoms across time. Cancer worry increased over time with 25% of participants exceeding the symptom threshold at baseline and 33% at follow-up. Quality of life was very high but slightly decreased over time (90.0% vs. 84.4%; p = .005), indicative of a greater number of navigators reporting pain/discomfort at follow-up. Social support was high (86.9% vs. 85.9%) and remained so. Top five role endorsements were (1) a feeling of belonging, (2) being involved in something good, (3) giving back, (4) feeling better as a person, and (5) improved communication skills. Program satisfaction was very high with support from program staff rated highest.

Conclusions

The study indicates that peer and caregiver navigators exhibited favorable physical and mental health across time. Furthermore, they experienced several benefits from navigation including a sense of meaning and the wish to give back. Results suggest that support provision within the peer and caregiver navigation program has also salutary effects for navigators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Data are available upon request.

References

  1. Flora PK, Bender JL, Miller AS, Parvin L, Soheilipour S, Maharaj N, Milosevic E, Matthew A, Kazanjian A (2020) A core competency framework for prostate cancer peer navigation. Support Care Cancer 28:2605–2614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-05059-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ziegler E, Hill J, Lieske B, Kleindem OV Knesebeck, Kofahl C, J (2022) Empowerment in cancer patients: does peer support make a difference? A systematic review. Psychooncology 31:683–704. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5869

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ustjanauskas AE, Bredice M, Nuhaily S, Kath L, Wells KJ (2016) Training in patient navigation: a review of the research literature. Health Promot Pract 17:373–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839915616362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hossain SN, Jaglal SB, Shepherd J, Perrier L, Tomasone JR, Sweet SN, Luong D, Allin S, Nelson MLA, Guilcher SJT, Munce SEP (2021) Web-based peer support interventions for adults living with chronic conditions: scoping review. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol 8(2):14321. https://doi.org/10.2196/14321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. King AJL, Evans M, Moore THM, Paterson C, Sharp D, Persad R, Huntley AL (2015) Prostate cancer and supportive care: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis of men’s experiences and unmet needs. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 24:618–634. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12286

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Maharaj N, Soheilipour S, Bender JL, Kazanjian A (2018) Understanding prostate cancer patients’ support needs: how do they manage living with cancer? Illness Crisis & Loss 29:51–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1054137318768728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bender JL, Flora PK, Milosevic E, Soheilipour S, Maharaj N, Dirlea M, Parvin L, Matthew A, Kazanjian A (2021) Training prostate cancer survivors and caregivers to be peer navigators: a blended online/in-person competency-based training program. Support Care Cancer 29:1235–1244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05586-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Giese-Davis J, Bliss-Isberg C, Carson K, Star P, Donaghy J, Cordova MJ, Stevens N, Wittenberg L, Batten C, Spiegel D (2006) The effect of peer counseling on quality of life following diagnosis of breast cancer: an observational study. Psychooncology 15:1014–1022. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1037

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Maxwell AE, Jo AM, Crespi CM, Sudan M, Bastani R (2010) Peer navigation improves diagnostic follow-up after breast cancer screening among Korean American women: results of a randomized trial. Cancer Causes Control 21:1931–1940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-010-9621-7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Mollica MA, Nemeth LS, Newman SD, Mueller M (2014) Sterba K (2014) Peer navigation in African American breast cancer survivors. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 5:131–144. https://doi.org/10.2147/PROM.S69744.eCollection

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Naha U, Freedland SJ, Abern MR, Moreira DM (2021) The association of cancer-specific anxiety with disease aggressiveness in men on active surveillance of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 24:335–340. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-00279-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hyde MK, Legg M, Occhipinti S, Lepore SJ, Ugalde A, Zajdlewicz L, Laurie K, Dunn J, Chambers SK (2018) Predictors of long-term distress in female partners of men diagnosed with prostate cancer. Psychooncology 27:946–954. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.4617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Malcarne VL, Ko CM, Roesch SC, Banthia R, Sadler GR (2019) Efficacy of problem-solving therapy for spouses of men with prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Psychooncology 28:497–504. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.4964

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Varner S, Lloyd G, Ranby KW, Callan S, Robertson C, Lipkus IM (2019) Illness uncertainty, partner support, and quality of life: a dyadic longitudinal investigation of couples facing prostate cancer. Psychooncology 28:2188–2194. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bender JL, Flora PK, Soheilipour S, Dirlea M, Maharaj N, Parvin L, Matthew A, Catton C, Jamnicky L, Pollock P, Kwan W, Finelli A, Kazanjian A (2022) Web-based peer navigation for men with prostate cancer and their family caregivers: a pilot feasibility study. Curr Oncol 29:4285–4299. https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol29060343

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP (1983) The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 67:361–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Douma KFL, Aaronson NK, Vasen HFA, Gerritsma MA, Gundy CM, Janssen EP (2010) Psychological distress and use of psychosocial support in familial adenomatous polyposis. Psychooncology 19:289–298. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. van de Wal M, van Oort I, Schouten J, Thewes B, Gielissen M, Prins J (2016) Fear of cancer recurrence in prostate cancer survivors. Acta Oncol 55:821–827. https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2016.1150607

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X (2011) Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 20(10):1727–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Investigators ENRICHD (2001) Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease (ENRICHD) study intervention: rationale and design. Psychosom Med 63:747–755

    Google Scholar 

  21. Brooke J (1996) SUS: a ’quick and dirty’ usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, McClelland IL (eds) Usability evaluation industry. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 189–194

    Google Scholar 

  22. Roman LA, Lindsay JK, Moore JS, Shoemaker AL (1999) Community health workers: examining the Helper Therapy principle. Public Health Nurs 16:87–95. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1446.1999.00087.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bekelman DB, Johnson-Koenke R, Bowles DW, Fischer SM (2018) Improving early palliative care with a scalable, stepped peer navigator and social work intervention: a single-arm clinical trial. J Palliat Med 21:1011–1016. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2017.0424

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Linden W, Vodermaier A, Mackenzie R, Greig D (2012) Anxiety and depression after cancer diagnosis: prevalence rates by cancer type, gender, and age. J Affect Disord 141:343–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.03.025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vodermaier A, Linden W, MacKenzie R, Greig D, Marshall C (2011) Disease stage predicts post-diagnosis anxiety and depression only in some types of cancer. Br J Cancer 105:1814–1847. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.503

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Watson E, Shinkins B, Frith E, Neal D, Hamdy F, Walter F, Weller D, Wilkinson C, Faithfull S, Wolstenholme J, Sooriakumaran P, Kastner C, Campbell C, Neal R, Butcher H, Matthews M, Perera R, Rose P (2016) Symptoms, unmet needs, psychological well-being and health status in survivors of prostate cancer: implications for redesigning follow-up. BJU Int 117:E10-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Katz D, Koppie TM, Wu D, Meng MV, Grossfeld GD, Sadesky N, Lubeck DP, Carroll PR (2002) Sociodemographic characteristics and health related quality of life in men attending prostate cancer support groups. J Urol 168:2092–2096. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000033591.64733.ef

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Steginga SK, Smith DP, Pinnock C, Metcalfe R, Gardiner RA, Dunn J (2007) Clinicians’ attitudes to prostate cancer peer-support groups. BJU Int 99:68–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06545.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pomery A, Schofield P, Xhilaga M, Gough K (2016) Skills, knowledge and attributes of support group leaders: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 99:672–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2015.11.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Malouff JM, Thorsteinsson EB, Schutte NS (2005) The relationship between the five-factor model of personality and symptoms of clinical disorders: a meta-analysis. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 27:101–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-005-5384-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Yannick S (2009) Openness to experience and active older adults’ life satisfaction: a trait and facet-level analysis. Pers Indiv Diff 47:637–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.05.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. O’Rourke L, Fisher PL, Campbell S, Wright A, Cherry MG (2021) Factors associated with fear of cancer recurrence in family caregivers of cancer survivors: a systematic review. Front Psychol 12:625654. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.625654

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Northouse LL, Mood DW, Montie JE, Sandler HM, Forman JD, Hussain M, Pienta KJ, Smith DC, Sanda MG, Kershaw T (2007) Living with prostate cancer: patients’ and spouses’ psychosocial status and quality of life. J Clin Oncol 25:4171–4177. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.09.6503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Thomas KS, Bower JE, Williamson TJ, Hoyt MA, Wellisch D, Stanton AL, Irwin M (2012) Post-traumatic disorder symptoms and blunted diurnal cortisol production in partners of prostate cancer patients. Psychoneuroendocrinol 37:1181–1190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2011.12.008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Jarrad RA, Hammad S (2020) Oncology nurses’ compassion fatigue, burn out and compassion satisfaction. Ann Gen Psychiatry 19:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12991-020-00272-9.eCollection

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Laor-Maayany R, Goldzweig G, Hasson-Ohayon I, Bar-Sela G, Engler-Gross A, Braun M (2020) Compassion fatigue among oncologists: the role of grief, sense of failure, and exposure to suffering and death. Support Care Cancer 28:2025–2031. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-05009-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. McLean B, Hossain N, Donison V, Gray M, Durbano S, Haase K, Alibhai SMH, Puts M (2021) Providing medical information to older adults in a web-based environment: systematic review. JMIR Aging 4(1):24092. https://doi.org/10.2196/24092

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the peer and caregiver navigators from two sites who generously gave their time and were dedicated research partners.

Funding

This research was funded by Prostate Cancer Canada and the Movember Foundation (Grant #20R20241).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Population and Public Health, The University of British Columbia, 2206 East Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada

    Andrea Vodermaier, Arminée Kazanjian & Shimae Soheilipour

  2. Cancer Rehabilitation and Survivorship, Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada

    Parminder Flora, Andrew Matthew & Jacqueline L. Bender

  3. Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M7, Canada

    Jacqueline L. Bender

Authors
  1. Andrea Vodermaier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arminée Kazanjian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shimae Soheilipour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Parminder Flora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrew Matthew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jacqueline L. Bender
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization and methodology by AV with contributions from AK and JB; data collection: SS and PF; formal analysis: AV and PF; writing—original draft preparation: AV; writing—review and editing: AV, AK, and JB; supervision: AK; project administration: SS, PF, and AM; funding acquisition: AK and JB. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Vodermaier.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of British Columbia (UBC BREB Number H14-01687, September 7, 2017).

Consent to participate

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects included in the study.

Consent for publication

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects included in the study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 31 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vodermaier, A., Kazanjian, A., Soheilipour, S. et al. Prostate cancer peer navigation: an observational study on navigators’ well-being, benefit finding, and program satisfaction. Support Care Cancer 31, 225 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07680-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07680-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation