Psycho-Oncologie

, Volume 6, Issue 4, pp 209–216 | Cite as

« Avoir le moral » après l’annonce d’un cancer : une étude auprès de personnes atteintes d’une tumeur cérébrale de haut grade

Open Access
Article Original / Original Article
  • 854 Downloads

Résumé

Malgré le recours fréquent au « moral » dans le discours profane lié au cancer, peu d’études se sont intéressées à sa nature même et à ce qui contribue au fait « d’avoir le moral ». Par le biais d’un questionnaire autoadministré, 43 personnes atteintes d’une tumeur cérébrale de haut grade ont été interrogées. Les résultats révèlent le caractère dynamique du « moral » puisqu’il s’est amélioré à la suite de l’annonce du diagnostic. Certaines stratégies d’adaptation et la perception d’avoir tenu un rôle plutôt passif dans les décisions de traitement semblent contribuer à cette amélioration du « moral ». D’autres études sont nécessaires afin de mieux comprendre la complexité du « moral ».

Mots clés

Étude Moral Cancer Coping Processus décisionnel 

“In good spirits” after getting a diagnosis of cancer: a study of patients with high-grade glioma

Abstract

Despite its frequent use in popular discourse about cancer, few studies have investigated the nature of being “in good spirits” and what contributes to it. To find out, 43 patients with high-grade glioma were asked to fill in a self-administered questionnaire. The results revealed the dynamic nature of this concept because being “in good spirits” improved since the diagnosis. The use of some coping strategies and the perception of having had a more passive role in the decision making seemed to contribute to the change in being “in good spirits”. Further studies are needed to better understand this complex issue.

Keywords

Study Being “in good spirits” Cancer Coping Decision making 

Références

  1. 1.
    Anderson D, Bilodeau B, Deshaies G, et al (2005) Validation canadienne-française du « MOS Social Support Survey ». Can J Cardiol 21(10):867–873PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arora NK, McHorney CA (2000) Patient preferences for medical decision-making: who really wants to participate? Med Care 38(3):335–341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bacqué MF (2010) Psycho-oncologie des cancers cérébraux. Psycho-Oncologie 4:69–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bauchet L, Rigau V, Daudé MH, et al (2007) French brain tumor data bank: methodology and first results on 10,000 cases. J Neurooncol 84:189–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beaver K, Booth K (2007) Information needs and decisionmaking preferences: comparing findings for gynaecological, breast and colorectal cancer. EJON 11(5):409–416Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Butow PN, McLean M, Dunn S, et al (1997) The dynamics of change: cancer patients’ preferences for information, involvement and support. Ann Oncol 8(9):857–863PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carver CS (1997) You want to measure coping but protocole’s too long: consider the Brief COPE. Int J Behav Med 4(1):92–100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coyne JC, Pajak TF, Harris J, et al (2007) Emotional well-being does not predict survival in head and neck cancer patients: a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group study. Cancer 110(11):2568–2575PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davison BJ, Parker PA, Goldenberg SL (2004) Patients’ preferences for communicating a prostate cancer diagnosis and participating in medical decision-making. BJU Int 93(1):47–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    DeAngelis L, Loeffler JS, Mamelack AN (2005) Primary and metastatic brain tumors. In: Pazdur R, Coia LR, Hoskins WJ, Wagman LD (eds) Cancer management: a multidisciplinary approach, 9th Edition. PRR, New York, pp 615–637Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, et al (1997) Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA 277(18):1485–1492PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P (1997) The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res 29(3):21–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dolbeault S, Bredart A, Mignot V, et al (2008) Screening for psychological distress in two French cancer centers: feasibility and performance of the adapted distress thermometer. Palliat Support Care 6(2):107–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ettner SL (1996) New evidence on the relationship between income and health. J Health Econ 15:67–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gustafsson M, Edvardsson T, Ahlström G (2006) The relationship between function, quality of life and coping in patients with low-grade gliomas. Support Care Cancer 14(12):1205–1212PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hack TF, Degner LF, Watson P, Sinha L (2006) Do patients benefit from participating in medical decision making? Longitudinal follow-up of women with breast cancer. Psychooncology 15(1):9–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Heyland DK, Dodek P, Rocker G, et al (2006) What matters most in end-of-life care: perceptions of seriously ill patients and their family members? CMAJ 174(5):643–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Janz NK, Wren PA, Copeland LA, et al (2004) Patient-physician concordance: preferences, perceptions, and factors influencing the breast cancer surgical decision. J Clin Oncol 22(15):3091–3098PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lazarus RS, Folkman S (1984) Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA (2005) Not all patients want to participate in decision-making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med 20(6):531–535PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mehnert A, Koch U (2008) Psychological comorbidity and health-related quality of life and its association with awareness, utilization, and need for psychosocial support in a cancer register-based sample of long-term breast cancer survivors. J Psychosom Res 64(4):383–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Muller L, Spitz E (2003) Évaluation multidimensionnelle du coping: validation du Brief COPE sur une population française. Encéphale XXIX:507–518, cahier no 1Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Saillant F (1988) Cancer et culture: produire le sens de sa maladie. Les Éditions Saint-Martin, Montréal, 321 pGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sarradon-Eck A (2004). Pour une anthropologie clinique: saisir le sens de l’expérience du cancer. In: Ben Soussan P (ed) Le cancer. Approches psychodynamiques chez l’adulte. Érès, Toulouse, pp 31–45Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Soum-Pouyalet F, Vega A, Cousson-Gélie F (2009) Le « moral » en cancérologie: stratégies et discours des soignants dans l’accompagnement des malades. Psycho-Oncologie 3:161–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL (1991) The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med 32(6):705–714PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stewart DE, Wong F, Cheung AM, et al (2000) Information needs and decisional preferences among women with ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 77(3):357–361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Strang S, Strang P (2001) Spiritual thoughts, coping and “sense of coherence” in brain tumour patients and their spouses. Palliat Med 15(2):127–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tattersall MH, Gattellari M, Voigt K, Butow PN (2002) When the treatment goal is not cure: are patients informed adequately? Support Care Cancer 10(4):314–321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Van’t Spijker A, Trijsburg RW, Duivenvoorden HJ (1997) Psychological sequelae of cancer diagnosis: a meta-analytical review of 58 studies after 1980. Psychosom Med 59(3):280–293Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Isabelle Marcoux 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.École interdisciplinaire des sciences de la santé, faculté des sciences de la santéuniversité d’OttawaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.ERSSCa-ERT- A901- EA 4275université de NantesNantesFrance

Personalised recommendations