Affiliation:
1. Department of Community & Behavioral Health Colorado School of Public Health Aurora Colorado USA
2. Latino Research and Policy Center Colorado School of Public Health Denver Colorado USA
3. Department of Biostatistics & Informatics Colorado School of Public Health Aurora Colorado USA
4. Department of Psychology College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Denver Colorado USA
5. Department of Family Medicine School of Medicine Aurora Colorado USA
6. Veterans Administration Medical Center Grand Junction Colorado USA
7. Hematology‐Oncology Denver Health and Hospital Authority Denver Colorado USA
8. Medical Oncology Ascension St. Vincent Evansville Cancer Center Newburgh IN USA
9. Department of Medicine National Jewish Health Denver Colorado USA
10. Radiation Oncology School of Medicine Aurora Colorado USA
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundThe comparative effectiveness study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03016403) assessed the effects of a stepped‐care intervention versus usual care on mental health outcomes, including anxiety, depression, coping self‐efficacy, emotional distress (anxiety and depression combined), health‐related quality of life (HRQoL), and perceived stress among underserved patients (i.e., low‐income, uninsured, underinsured) with lung cancer (LC) and head‐and‐neck cancer (HNC).MethodsIn a randomized controlled trial, we investigated if 147 patients who received the stepped‐care intervention had better mental health outcomes compared to 139 patients who received usual care. Using an intent‐to‐treat approach, we analyzed outcomes with linear mixed models.ResultsFor the primary outcomes estimated mean differences (denoted by “Δ”), depression (Δ = 1.75, 95% CI = 0.52, 2.98, p = 0.01) and coping self‐efficacy (Δ = −15.24, 95% CI = −26.12, −4.36, p = 0.01) were better for patients who received the intervention compared to patients who received usual care, but anxiety outcomes were not different. For secondary outcomes, emotional distress (Δ = 1.97, 95% CI: 0.68, 3.54, p =< 0.01) and HRQoL (Δ = −4.16 95% CI: −7.45, −0.87, p = 0.01) were better for patients who received the intervention compared to usual care patients, while perceived stress was not different across groups.ConclusionsThe stepped‐care intervention influenced depression and coping self‐efficacy, important outcomes for patients with acute illnesses like LC and HNC. Although differences in emotional distress met the minimally important differences (MID) previously reported, depression and HRQoL were not above the MID threshold. Our study is among a few to report differences in mental health outcomes for underserved LC and HNC patients after receiving a psychological intervention.ClinicalTrials.gov identifierNCT03016403.
Funder
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,Oncology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献