2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/158025
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Impact of Symptom Clusters on Outcomes in Breast Cancer Women
Abstract:
Impact of Symptom Clusters on Outcomes in Breast Cancer Women
Conference Sponsor:Western Institute of Nursing
Conference Year:2006
Author:Cho, Maria, RN, PhD
P.I. Institution Name:University of California, San Francisco
Title:Assistant Adjunct Professor
Contact Address:2 Koret Way, Box 0610, R605R, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
Contact Telephone:415-476-6975
Co-Authors:Marylin J. Dodd, RN, PhD, FAAN; and Bruce A. Cooper, PhD
Purpose/Aims: To explore quality of life (QOL) and functional status among four different breast cancer symptom cluster groups at the end of the first cycle of CTX (T1), at the completion of their cancer treatment (T2), and at a 4-6 month follow up study visit after the completion of their cancer treatment (T3; end of study). Background: The majority of oncology research in the area of cancer-related symptoms is directed toward either a single symptom, such as pain or fatigue, or toward associated symptoms, such as depression or anxiety. Although this approach has advanced the understanding of some symptoms, the concept of concurrent symptoms and their consequences (e.g., quality of life, functional status) is an area where more research is needed. In 2001, Dodd and her colleagues proposed that when three or more concurrent symptoms (e.g., pain, fatigue, sleep insufficiency) are related to each other, they form a "symptom cluster" (Dodd et al., 2001). Few studies in the area of oncology research/cancer-related symptom management explore relationships between symptom clusters and outcomes. Methods: Secondary data analysis from an ongoing randomized clinical trial. Ninety-two women diagnosed with breast cancer, mean age 49 (SD=9.6), completed the QOL scale, Brief Pain Inventory, General Sleep Disturbance Scale, Piper Fatigue Scale, Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale at the three time points discussed earlier. Baseline mean functional status was over 80 (0-100, Karnofsky Performance Score) during the study. 78.4% earned over $40,000/year, mean education level was 16.1 years (SD 2.82). 72.5% were married, and 79% were white. The questionnaires used have established reliability and validity in this population. Results: The cluster analysis grouped patients into four groups based on similarities in the severity of their symptom experience at baseline (T1); 1) low symptom severity group (LS); 2) mild Depression, Fatigue, and Sleep (DFS); 3) moderate Depression, Fatigue, Pain & Sleep (DFPS) group and 4) high symptoms severity group (HS). At each time of the three points, functional status and QOL were statistically significantly different among groups, especially LS versus HS groups. However, there was no significant difference on QOL and functional status within each group over time. Implications: Results of this study indicate that, at all three time points, the LS group reported better overall QOL and higher functional status than the other three groups. The application of cluster analysis to symptom cluster research is exploratory, although further research may show that patients with high severity symptoms are at a higher risk for poorer outcomes. Study Funding: NIH, NCI, RO1 CA 107080 (on going).
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Western Institute of Nursing

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleImpact of Symptom Clusters on Outcomes in Breast Cancer Womenen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/158025-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Impact of Symptom Clusters on Outcomes in Breast Cancer Women</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Western Institute of Nursing</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2006</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Cho, Maria, RN, PhD</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">University of California, San Francisco</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Assistant Adjunct Professor</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">2 Koret Way, Box 0610, R605R, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-phone"><td class="label">Contact Telephone:</td><td class="value">415-476-6975</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">maria.cho@nursing.ucsf.edu</td></tr><tr class="item-co-authors"><td class="label">Co-Authors:</td><td class="value">Marylin J. Dodd, RN, PhD, FAAN; and Bruce A. Cooper, PhD</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">Purpose/Aims: To explore quality of life (QOL) and functional status among four different breast cancer symptom cluster groups at the end of the first cycle of CTX (T1), at the completion of their cancer treatment (T2), and at a 4-6 month follow up study visit after the completion of their cancer treatment (T3; end of study). Background: The majority of oncology research in the area of cancer-related symptoms is directed toward either a single symptom, such as pain or fatigue, or toward associated symptoms, such as depression or anxiety. Although this approach has advanced the understanding of some symptoms, the concept of concurrent symptoms and their consequences (e.g., quality of life, functional status) is an area where more research is needed. In 2001, Dodd and her colleagues proposed that when three or more concurrent symptoms (e.g., pain, fatigue, sleep insufficiency) are related to each other, they form a &quot;symptom cluster&quot; (Dodd et al., 2001). Few studies in the area of oncology research/cancer-related symptom management explore relationships between symptom clusters and outcomes. Methods: Secondary data analysis from an ongoing randomized clinical trial. Ninety-two women diagnosed with breast cancer, mean age 49 (SD=9.6), completed the QOL scale, Brief Pain Inventory, General Sleep Disturbance Scale, Piper Fatigue Scale, Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale at the three time points discussed earlier. Baseline mean functional status was over 80 (0-100, Karnofsky Performance Score) during the study. 78.4% earned over $40,000/year, mean education level was 16.1 years (SD 2.82). 72.5% were married, and 79% were white. The questionnaires used have established reliability and validity in this population. Results: The cluster analysis grouped patients into four groups based on similarities in the severity of their symptom experience at baseline (T1); 1) low symptom severity group (LS); 2) mild Depression, Fatigue, and Sleep (DFS); 3) moderate Depression, Fatigue, Pain &amp; Sleep (DFPS) group and 4) high symptoms severity group (HS). At each time of the three points, functional status and QOL were statistically significantly different among groups, especially LS versus HS groups. However, there was no significant difference on QOL and functional status within each group over time. Implications: Results of this study indicate that, at all three time points, the LS group reported better overall QOL and higher functional status than the other three groups. The application of cluster analysis to symptom cluster research is exploratory, although further research may show that patients with high severity symptoms are at a higher risk for poorer outcomes. Study Funding: NIH, NCI, RO1 CA 107080 (on going).</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T20:26:07Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T20:26:07Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipWestern Institute of Nursingen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.