The impact of husbands' prostate cancer diagnosis and participation in a behavioral lifestyle intervention on spouses' lives and relationships with their partners

Cancer Nursing

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2016, Pages E1-E9

  Rossen, Sine ^a   Hansen Nord, Nete Sloth ^a   Kayser, Lars ^c   Borre, Michael ^b   Borre, Mette ^b   Larsen, Ryan Godsk ^d,e   Trichopoulou, Antonia ^f   Boffetta, Paolo ^g   Tjønneland, Anne ^a   Hansen, Rikke Dalgaard ^a  

^a DANISH CANCER SOCIETY RESEARCH CENTER   (Denmark)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^d AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^e Active Institute   (Denmark)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Greece)

^g MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Active surveillance; Anxieties; Coping mechanisms; Empowerment; Lifestyle intervention; Low risk prostate cancer; Reassurance; Spouse

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANXIETY; ARTICLE; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COPING BEHAVIOR; DIET; EXERCISE; FAMILY RELATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INFORMATION SEEKING; LIFESTYLE MODIFICATION; LOW RISK PATIENT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT WORRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REASSURANCE; SELF CARE; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; SOCIAL PARTICIPATION; SOCIAL SUPPORT; SPOUSE; ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; BEHAVIOR THERAPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENMARK; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMAN RELATION; LIFESTYLE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; BEHAVIOR THERAPY; DENMARK; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; LIFE STYLE; MALE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SPOUSES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84959375349     PISSN: 0162220X     EISSN: 15389804     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000259     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Riechers EA. Including partners into the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a review of the literature to provide a model of care. Urol Nurs. 2004; 24(1):22-29, 38.
2. Bruun P, Pedersen BD, Osther PJ, Wagner L. The lonely female partner: a central aspect of prostate cancer. Urol Nurs. 2011;31(5):294-299.
3. Green HJ, Wells DJ, Laakso L. Coping in men with prostate cancer and their partners: a quantitative and qualitative study. Eur J Cancer Care. 2011;2:237-247.
4. Northouse LL, Mood DW, Montie JE, et al. Living with prostate cancer: patients' and spouses' psychosocial status and quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(27):4171-4177.
5. Seiler D, Randazzo M, Leupold U, et al. Protocol-based active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: anxiety levels in both men and their partners. Urology. 2012;80(3):564-569.
6. Ezer H, Chachamovich JL, Chachamovich E. Do men and their wives see it the same way? Congruence within couples during the first year of prostate cancer. Psychooncology. 2011;20(2):155-164.
7. Docherty A, Brothwell CP, Symons M. The impact of inadequate knowledge on patient and spouse experience of prostate cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2007; 30(1):58-63.
8. Wu LM, Mohamed NE, Winkel G, Diefenbach MA. Patient and spouse illness beliefs and quality of life in prostate cancer patients. Psychol Health. 2013;28(4):355-368.
9. Fagundes CP, Berg CA, Wiebe DJ. Intrusion, avoidance, and daily negative affect among couples coping with prostate cancer: a dyadic investigation. J Fam Psychol. 2012;26(2):246-253.
10. Banthia R, Malcarne VL, Varni JW, Ko CM, Sadler GR, Greenbergs HL. The effects of dyadic strength and coping styles on psychological distress in couples faced with prostate cancer. J Behav Med. 2003;26(1):31-52.
11. Feasibility Study on a Nordic Lifestyle Intervention Trial Among Men With Prostate Cancer (NILS). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01300104. Accessed April 6, 2015.
12. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine; 1967.
13. Scott KW. Relating categories in grounded theory analysis: using a conditional relationship guide and reflective coding matrix. Qual Rep. 2004;9(1): 113-126.
14. Lincoln Y, Guba EG. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1985.
15. Schulz PJ, Nakamoto K. Health literacy and patient empowerment in health communication: the importance of separating conjoined twins. Patient Educ Couns. 2013;90(1):4-11.
16. Thomas KW, Velthouse BA. Cognitive elements of empowerment Van interpretive model of intrinsic task motivation. Acad Manage Rev. 1990; 15(4):666-681.
17. Bandura A. Self-efficacy Vtoward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84(2):191-215.
18. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2000; 55(1):68-78.
19. Nutbeam D. Health promotion glossary. Health Promot Int. 1998;13(4): 349-357.
20. Osborne RH, Batterham RW, Elsworth GR, Hawkins M, Buchbinder R. The grounded psychometric development and initial validation of the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). BMC Public Health. 2013;13:658.
21. Bandura A. Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2000;9(3):75-78.
22. Ervik B, Nordoy T, Asplund K. In the middle and on the sideline: the experience of spouses of men with prostate cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2013;36(3):E7-E14.