Annals of Behavioral Medicine

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 54–64 | Cite as

Randomized pilot of a self-guided internet coping group for women with early-stage breast cancer

  • Jason E. Owen
  • Joshua C. Klapow
  • David L. Roth
  • John L. Shuster
  • Jeff Bellis
  • Ron Meredith
  • Diane C. Tucker
Article

Abstract

Background: Internet-based methods for provision of psychological support and intervention to cancer survivors hold promise for increasing the public impact of such treatments.Purpose: The goal of this controlled pilot study was to examine the effect and potential mechanisms of action of a self-guided, Internet-based coping-skills training group on quality of life outcomes in women with early-stage breast cancer.Methods: Sixty-two women completed baseline evaluations and were randomized into either a small online coping group or a waiting-list control condition.Results: No main effects for treatment were observed at the 12-week follow up. However, there was a significant interaction between baseline self-reported health status and treatment, such that women with poorer self-perceived health status showed greater improvement in perceived health over time when assigned to the treatment condition. Linguistic analyses revealed that positive changes across quality of life variables were associated with greater expression of negative emotions such as sadness and anxiety, greater cognitive processing, and lower expression of health-related concerns.Conclusions: These results demonstrate the potential efficacy of self-guided Internet coping groups while highlighting the limitations of such groups.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. (1).
    Greer S: Psychological intervention: The gap between research and practice.Acta Oncologica. 2002.41:238–243.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. (2).
    Institute of Medicine National Research Council:Meeting Psychosocial Needs of Women With Breast Cancer. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2004.Google Scholar
  3. (3).
    Gustafson DH, Wise M, McTavish F, et al.: Development and pilot evaluation of a computer-based support system for women with breast cancer.Journal of Psychosocial Oncology. 1993.11:69–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. (4).
    Cunningham AJ, Edmonds CVI, Jenkins GP, et al.: A randomized controlled trial of the effects of group psychological therapy on survival in women with metastatic breast cancer.Psycho-Oncology. 1998.7:508–517.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. (5).
    Owen JE, Klapow JC, Roth DL, et al.: Improving the effectiveness of adjuvant psychological treatment: The feasibility of providing online support.Psycho-Oncology (in press).Google Scholar
  6. (6).
    Fukui S, Kugaya A, Kamiya M, et al.: Participation in a psychosocial group intervention among Japanese women with primary breast cancer and its associated factors.Psycho-Oncology. 2001.10:419–427.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. (7).
    Jacobsen PB, Meade CD, Stein KD, et al.: Efficacy and costs of two forms of stress management training for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2002.20:2851–2862.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. (8).
    Owen JE, Klapow JC, Hicken B, Tucker DC: Psychosocial interventions for cancer: Review and analysis using a three-tiered outcomes model.Psycho-Oncology. 2001.10:218–230.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. (9).
    Graves KD: Social cognitive theory and cancer patients’ quality of life: A meta-analysis of psychosocial intervention components.Health Psychology. 2003.22:210–219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. (10).
    Winzelberg A: The analysis of an electronic support group for individuals with eating disorders.Computers in Human Behavior. 1997.13:393–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. (11).
    Lieberman MA, Golant M, Giese-Davis J, et al.: Electronic support groups for breast carcinoma: A clinical trial of effectiveness.Cancer. 2003.97:920–925.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. (12).
    Gustafson DH, Hawkins R, Pingree S, et al.: Effect of computer support on younger women with breast cancer.Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2001.16:435–445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. (13).
    Winzelberg AJ, Classen C, Alpers GW, et al.: Evaluation of an Internet support group for women with primary breast cancer.Cancer. 2003.97:1164–1173.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. (14).
    Classen C, Koopman C, Angell K, Spiegel D: Coping styles associated with psychological adjustment to advanced breast cancer.Health Psychology. 1996.15:434–437.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. (15).
    Giese-Davis J, Koopman C, Butler LD, et al.: Change in emotion-regulation strategy for women with metastatic breast cancer following supportive-expressive group therapy.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2002.70:916–925.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. (16).
    Cunningham AJ, Edmonds CV, Phillips C, et al.: A prospective, longitudinal study of psychological work to duration of survival in patients with metastatic cancer.Psycho-Oncology. 2000.9:323–339.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. (17).
    Pennebaker JW, King LA: Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999.77:1296–1312.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. (18).
    Esterling BA, L’Abate L, Murray EJ, Pennebaker JW: Empirical foundations for writing in prevention and psychotherapy: Mental and physical health outcomes.Clinical Psychology Review. 1999.19:79–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. (19).
    Campbell RS, Pennebaker JW: The secret life of pronouns: Flexibility in writing style and physical health.Psychological Science. 2003.14:60–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. (20).
    Stanton AL, Danoff-Burg S, Sworowski LA, et al.: Randomized, controlled trial of written emotional expression and benefit finding in breast cancer patients.Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2002.20:4160–4168.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. (21).
    Klemm P, Hurst M, Dearholt SL, Trone SR: Gender differences on Internet cancer support groups.Computers in Nursing. 1999.17:65–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. (22).
    Owen JE, Klapow JC, Roth DL, Tucker DC: Use of the Internet for information and support: Disclosure among persons with breast and prostate cancer.Journal of Behavioral Medicine (in press).Google Scholar
  23. (23).
    Fawzy FI, Fawzy NW: A structured psychoeducational intervention for cancer patients.General Hospital Psychiatry. 1994.16:149–192.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. (24).
    Nezu AM, Nezu CM, Friedman SH, Faddis S, Houts PS:Helping Cancer Patients Cope. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. (25).
    Cella D:F.A.C.I.T. Manual. Chicago: Center on Outcomes, Research, and Education, Evanston Northwestern Healthcare and Northwestern University, 1997.Google Scholar
  26. (26).
    Brady MJ, Cella DF, Mo F, et al.: Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast quality-of-life instrument.Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1997.15:974–986.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. (27).
    Brooks R: EuroQuol: The current state of play.Health Policy. 1996.37:53–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. (28).
    Llach XB, Herdman M, Schiaffino A, Dipstat A: Determining correspondence between scores on the EQ-5D “Thermometer” and a 5-point categorical rating scale.Medical Care. 1999.37:671–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. (29).
    Horowitz M, Wilner N, Alvarez W: Impact of Event Scale: A measure of subjective stress.Psychosomatic Medicine. 1979.41:209–218.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. (30).
    Edgar L, Rosberger Z, Nowlis D: Coping with cancer during the first year after diagnosis.Cancer. 1992.69:817–828.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. (31).
    Portenoy RK, Thaler HT, Kornblith AB, et al.: The Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale: An instrument for the evaluation of symptom prevalence, characteristics, and distress.European Journal of Cancer. 1994.30A:1326–1336.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. (32).
    Kirakowski J, Claridge N, Whitehand R: Human centered measures of success in web design.Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Human Factors and the Web, Basking Ridge, NJ: 1998. Retrieved from http://www.research.att.com/conf/hfweb/index.htmlfGoogle Scholar
  33. (33).
    Pennebaker JW, Francis ME, Booth RJ:Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count: LIWC2001 Manual. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 2001.Google Scholar
  34. (34).
    Cordova MJ, Cunningham LLC, Carlson CR, Andrykowski M: Social constraints, cognitive processing, and adjustment to breast cancer.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2001.69:706–711.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. (35).
    Gottschalk LA, Bechtel RJ:PCAD2000: Psychiatric content analysis and diagnosis. Corona del Mar, CA: GB Software, 2000.Google Scholar
  36. (36).
    Lebovits AH, Holland JC: Use of the Gottschalk-Gleser verbal content analysis scales with medically ill patients.Psychosomatic Medicine. 1983.45:305–320.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. (37).
    Gottschalk LA: The application of computerized content analysis of natural language in psychotherapy research now and in the future.American Journal of Psychotherapy. 2000.54:305–311.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. (38).
    Gottschalk LA, Holcombe RF, Jackson D, Bechtel RJ: The effects of anticancer chemotherapeutic drugs on cognitive function and other neuropsychiatric dimensions in breast cancer patients.Methods and Findings in Experimental Clinical Pharmacology. 2003.2:117–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. (39).
    Helgeson VS, Cohen S, Schulz R, Yasko J: Group support interventions for women with breast cancer: Who benefits from what?Health Psychology. 2000.19:107–114.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. (40).
    Taylor KL, Lamdan RM, Siegel JE, et al.: Psychological adjustment among African American breast cancer patients: One-year follow-up results of a randomized psychoeducational group intervention.Health Psychology. 2003.22:316–323.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. (41).
    Ray JW, Shadish WR: How interchangeable are different estimators of effect size?Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1996.64:1316–1325.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. (42).
    Hedges LV, Olkin I:Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic, 1985.Google Scholar
  43. (43).
    Andersen BL: Psychological interventions for cancer patients to enhance the quality of life.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1992.60:552–568.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. (44).
    Cordova MJ, Giese-Davis J, Golant M, et al.: Mood disturbance in community cancer support groups: The role of emotional suppression and fighting spirit.Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2003.55:461–467.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. (45).
    Stanton AL, Kirk SB, Cameron CL, Danoff-Burg S: Coping through emotional approach: Scale construction and validation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000.78:1150–1169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. (46).
    Meyer TJ, Mark MM: Statistical power and implications of meta-analysis for clinical research in psychosocial oncology.Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 1996.41:409–413.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. (47).
    Spijker AV, Trijsburg RW, Duivenvoorden HJ: Psychological sequelae of cancer diagnosis: A meta-analytic review of 58 studies after 1980.Psychosomatic Medicine. 1997.59:280–293.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Behavioral Medicine 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jason E. Owen
    • 1
  • Joshua C. Klapow
    • 2
  • David L. Roth
    • 3
  • John L. Shuster
    • 4
  • Jeff Bellis
    • 5
  • Ron Meredith
    • 2
  • Diane C. Tucker
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyLoma Linda UniversityLoma Linda
  2. 2.Department of Psychology Department of Health Care Organization and Policy Center for Outcomes and Effectiveness Research and EducationUniversity of AlabamaBirmingham
  3. 3.Department of BiostatisticsUniversity of AlabamaBirmingham
  4. 4.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of Alabama School of MedicineUSA
  5. 5.Department of Health BehaviorUniversity of AlabamaBirmingham

Personalised recommendations