Self‐management interventions for cancer survivors: A systematic review and evaluation of intervention content and theories. Issue 11 (15th October 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cuthbert, Colleen A.; Farragher, Janine F.; Hemmelgarn, Brenda R.; Ding, Qirui; McKinnon, Geoffrey P.; Cheung, Winson Y.
• Is Part Of: Psycho-oncology. Volume 28:Issue 11(2019)
• Page Start: 2119
• Page End: 2140
• Publication Date: 2019-10-15
• Subjects: cancer survivors -- psychoeducational interventions -- self‐management -- systematic review; Cancer -- Psychological aspects -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Social aspects -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- psychology -- Periodicals; 616.9940019
• DOI: 10.1002/pon.5215
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1057-9249

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: Self‐management has been proposed as a strategy to help cancer patients optimize their health and well‐being during survivorship. Previous reviews have shown variable effects of self‐management on outcomes. The theoretical basis and psychoeducational components of these interventions have not been evaluated in detail. We aimed to evaluate the evidence for self‐management and provide a description of the components of these interventions. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of self‐management interventions for adults who had completed primary cancer treatment by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry, and Cochrane CENTRAL Registry of Controlled Trials. We included experimental and quasiexperimental designs. Data synthesis included narrative and tabular summary of results; heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes precluded meta‐analysis. Study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool or the risk of bias of nonrandomized studies tool. Results: Forty‐one studies published between 1994 and 29 March 2018 were included. Studies were predominantly randomized controlled trials and targeted to breast cancer survivors. A variety of intervention designs, psychoeducational components, and outcomes were identified. Less than 50% of the studies included a theoretical framework. There was variability of effects across most outcomes. Risk of bias could not be fully assessed. Conclusions: There are limitations in the design and research on self‐management interventions for cancer survivors that hinder their translation into clinical practice. Further research is needed to understand if these interventions are an important type of support for cancer survivors.