Associations between dyadic coping and supportive care needs: findings from a study with hematologic cancer patients and their partners
- 506 Downloads
The way couples mutually cope with hematologic cancer is likely to influence their levels of supportive care needs (SCN). Therefore, this study evaluated the levels of dyadic coping (DC) and SCN and the concurrent associations between both variables.
Three hundred thirty patients with a hematologic malignancy (63% male) and their partners completed the dyadic coping inventory (DCI) and the supportive care needs survey (SCNS-SF-34-G). The levels of dyadic coping (DC) and supportive care needs (SCN) were compared with representative validation samples. Correlational analyses and actor-partner interdependence models (APIM) were calculated to estimate the association between DC and SCN.
Partners’ stress communication of cancer patients (as part of DC) was decreased in contrast to that of a non-cancer sample. The perception of partners’ delegated DC was higher (both with a moderate effect size of g ≥ |0.50|). SCN of patients and partners were lower in the dimensions health system/information and physical problems/daily living in contrast to those of a cancer patients’ validation sample (both with a small effect of g ≥ |0.20|). Higher perceptions of partners’ negative DC were associated with higher SCN for both patients and partners. The same was true for patients’ own stress communication and SCN, but only for the patients. Sociodemographic and illness-related factors were only partially related with the SCN of patients and partners.
In order to diminish SCN of patients and partners, a possible way is to strengthen the quality of the dyadic relation. Due to its associations with elevated SCN, stress communication and negative dyadic coping behaviours may be useful targets for psychosocial interventions.
KeywordsCancer Oncology Dyadic coping Supportive care needs Couples
We would like to thank all the couples for their participation in the study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests.
Source of funding
This work was supported by a grant from the Deutsche José Carreras Leukämie-Stiftung (grant no. DJCLS R 12/36).
- 6.Bodenmann G (2000) Stress und Coping bei Paaren. Hogrefe, GöttingenGoogle Scholar
- 13.Sklenarova H, Krumpelmann A, Haun MW, Friederich HC, Huber J, Thomas M, Winkler EC, Herzog W, Hartmann M (2015) When do we need to care about the caregiver? Supportive care needs, anxiety, and depression among informal caregivers of patients with cancer and cancer survivors. Cancer 121:1513–1519CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Bodenmann G (2008) Dyadisches coping Inventar. Huber, BernGoogle Scholar
- 17.Randall AK, Hilpert P, Jimenez-Arista LE, Walsh KJ, Bodenmann G (2016) Dyadic coping in the US: psychometric properties and validity for use of the English version of the dyadic coping inventory. Curr Psychol 570–582Google Scholar
- 24.Bartley EJ, Edmond SN, Wren AA, Somers TJ, Teo I, Zhou S, Rowe KA, Abernethy AP, Keefe FJ, Shelby RA (2014) Holding back moderates the association between health symptoms and social well-being in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. J Pain Symptom Manag 48:374–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Revenson TA, Griva K, Luszczynska A, Morrison V, Panagopoulou E, Vilchinsky N, Hagedoorn M (2016) Caregiving as a dyadic process. In: Revenson TA et al (eds) Caregiving in the illness context. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, pp. 25–37Google Scholar