Design and process evaluation of an informative website tailored to breast cancer survivors’ and intimate partners’ post-treatment care needs

BMC Research Notes

Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij³  Lilian Lechner¹  Caroline Charlier¹  Elke Van Hoof²  Evelyn Pauwels³ 

[1] Faculty of Psychology, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, the Netherlands;Belgian Cancer Centre, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Brussels, Belgium;Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Movement and Sport Sciences, Ghent University, Watersportlaan 2, 9000, Gent, Belgium

关键词: Survivorship;    Internet;    Process evaluation;    Design study;    Partner;    Breast cancer;   

Others  :  1165528
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-5-548

 received in 2012-02-03, accepted in 2012-09-26,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

On-line provision of information during the transition phase after treatment carries great promise in meeting shortcomings in post-treatment care for breast cancer survivors and their partners. The objectives of this study are to describe the development and process evaluation of a tailored informative website and to assess which characteristics of survivors and partners, participating in the feasibility study, are related to visiting the website.

Methods

The development process included quantitative and qualitative assessments of survivors’ and partners’ care needs and preferences. Participants’ use and evaluation of the website were explored by conducting baseline and post-measurements. During the intervening 10–12 weeks 57 survivors and 28 partners were granted access to the website.

Results

Fifty-seven percent (n=21) of survivors who took part in the post-measurement indicated that they had visited the website. Compared to non-visitors (n=16), they were more likely to have a partner and a higher income, reported higher levels of self-esteem and had completed treatment for a longer period of time. Partners who consulted the on-line information (42%, n=8) were younger and reported lower levels of social support compared to partners who did not visit the website (n=11). Visitors generally evaluated the content and lay-out positively, yet some believed the information was incomplete and impersonal.

Conclusions

The website reached only about half of survivors and partners, yet was mostly well-received. Besides other ways of providing information and support, a website containing clear-cut and tailored information could be a useful tool in post-treatment care provision.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Pauwels et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Allen JD, Savadatti S, Levy AG: The transition from breast cancer ‘patient’ to ‘survivor’. Psycho-Oncol 2009, 18:71-78.
• [2]Costanzo ES, Lutgendorf SK, Mattes ML, Trehan S, Robinson CB, Tewfik F, Roman SL: Adjusting to life after treatment: distress and quality of life following treatment for breast cancer. Brit J Cancer 2007, 97:1625-1631.
• [3]Hodgkinson K, Butow P, Hunt GE, Wyse R, Hobbs KM, Wain G: Life after cancer: couples’ and partners’ psychological adjustment and supportive care needs. Support Care Cancer 2007, 15:405-415.
• [4]Kim Y, Kashy DA, Spillers RL, Evans TV: Needs assessment of family caregivers of cancer survivors: three cohorts comparison. Psycho-Oncol 2010, 19:573-582.
• [5]Mikkelsen TH, Søndergaard J, Jensen AB, Olesen F: Cancer rehabilitation: psychosocial rehabilitation needs after discharge from hospital? Scan J Prim Health 2008, 26:216-221.
• [6]Schmid-Büchi S, Halfens RJG, Dassen T, van den Borne B: Psychosocial problems and needs of post-treatment patients with breast cancer and their relatives. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2011, 15:260-266.
• [7]Stenberg U, Ruland CM, Miaskowski C: Review of the literature on the effects of caring for a patient with cancer. Psycho-Oncol 2010, 19:1013-1025.
• [8]van de Poll-Franse LV, van Eensbergen MCHJ: Internet use by cancer survivors: current use and future wishes. Support Care Cancer 2008, 16:1189-1195.
• [9]Basch EM, Thaler HT, Shi W, Yakren S, Schrag D: Use of information resources by patients with cancer and their companions. Cancer 2004, 100:2476-2483.
• [10]Simon C, Schramm S: Cancer and the computerized family: towards a clinical ethics of “indirect” Internet use. Med Health Care and Philos 2008, 11:337-341.
• [11]Huang GJ, Penson DF: Internet health resources and the cancer patient. Cancer Invest 2008, 26:202-207.
• [12]Ziebland S, Chapple A, Dumelow C, Evans J, Prinjha S, Rozmovits L: How the internet affects patients’ experience of cancer: a qualitative study. BMJ 2004, 328:564.
• [13]Klemm P, Wheeler E: Cancer caregiver online. Hope, emotional roller coaster and physical/emotional/psychological responses. CIN 2005, 23:38-45.
• [14]Satterlund MJ, McCaul KD, Sandgren AK: Information gathering by time by breast cancer patients. J Med Internet Res 2003, 5:e15.
• [15]Doolittle GC, Spaulding A: Online cancer services: types of services offered and associated health outcomes. J Med Internet Res 2005, 7:e35.
• [16]Eysenbach G: The impact of the Internet on cancer outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin 2003, 53:356-371.
• [17]Beaudoin CE, Tao CC: Modeling the impact of online cancer resources on supporters of cancer patients. New Media Soc 2008, 10:321-344.
• [18]Ryhänen AM, Siekkinen M, Rankinen S, Korvenranta H, Leino-Kilpi H: The effects of Internet or interactive computer-based patient education in the field of breast cancer: a systematic literature review. Pat Educ Couns 2010, 79:5-13.
• [19]Kok G, van den Borne B, Mullen PD: Effectiveness of health education and health promotion: meta-analyses of effect studies and determinants of effectiveness. Pat Educ Couns 1997, 30:19-27.
• [20]McGuire WJ: Attitudes and attitude change. In Handbook of social psychology, vol. 2. Edited by Lindzey G, Aronson E, Lindzey G, Aronson E. Random House, New York; 1985:233-346.
• [21]National Cancer Institut: Making Health Communication Programs work. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville; 2001.
• [22]Hill-Kayser CE, Vachani C, Hampshire MK, Jacobs LA, Metz JM: An Internet tool for creation of cancer survivorship care plans for survivors and health care providers: design, implementation, use and user satisfaction. J Med Internet Res 2009, 11:e39.
• [23]Hill-Kayser CE: High level use and satisfaction with Internet-based breast cancer survivorship care plans. Breast J 2012, 18:97-99.
• [24]Pauwels E, Charlier C, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Lechner L, Van Hoof E: Care needs after primary breast cancer treatment. Survivors’ associated sociodemographic and medical characteristics. Psycho-Oncol 2011. (Article first published online
• [25]Vandelanotte C, De Bourdeaudhuij I: Acceptability and feasibility of a computer-tailored physical activity intervention using stage of change: project FAITH. Health Educ Res 2003, 18:304-317.
• [26]Ezendam NPM, Oenema A, van de Looij-Jansen PM, Brug J: Design and evaluation protocol of “FATaintPHAT”, a computer-tailored intervention to prevent excessive weight gain in adolescents. BMC Publ Health 2007, 7:324-334. BioMed Central Full Text
• [27]Ruland CM, Jeneson A, Andersen T, Andersen R, Slaughter L, Schjødt-Osmo B, Moore SM: Designing tailored Internet support to assist cancer patients in illness management. AMIA 2007, 11:635-639. Symposium Proceedings
• [28]Spinhoven P, Ormel J, Sloekers PPA, Kempen GJM, Speckens AEM, Van Hemert AM: A validation study of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in different groups of Dutch subjects. Psychol Med 1997, 27:363-370.
• [29]Zigmond AS, Snaith RP: The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiat Scand 1983, 67:361-370.
• [30]Rosenberg M: Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ; 1965.
• [31]Moss-Morris R, Weinman J, Petrie KJ, Horne R, Cameron LD, Buick D: The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R). Psychol Health 2002, 17:1-16.
• [32]Van Sonderen E: The measurement of social support with the Social Support List-Interactions (SSL-I) and the Social Support List-Discrepancies (SSL –D). Dutch manual. Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken, Groningen; 1993.
• [33]Endler NS, Parker JDA: Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations. Manual. Multi-Health Systems, Toronto; 1990. [Endler NS, Parker JDA]
• [34]Endler NS, Parker JDA, de Ridder DTD, van Heck GL: Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations. CISS Handleiding. Swets Test Publishers, Lisse; 2004.
• [35]Sprangers MA, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, Franklin J, te Velde A, Muller M, Franzini L, Williams A, de Haes HC, Hopwood P, Cull A, Aaronson NK: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country field study. J Clin Oncol 1996, 14:2756-2768.
• [36]Cella D, Lai J, Chang C, Peterman A, Slavin M: Fatigue in cancer patients compared with fatigue in the General United States Population. Cancer 2002, 94:528-538.
• [37]Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R: A global measure of perceived stress. J Health Soc Behav 1983, 24:385-396.
• [38]Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M: Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs. Edited by Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M. NFER-NELSON, Windsor; 1995:35-37.
• [39]Pauwels E, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Charlier C, Lechner L, Van Hoof E: Psychosocial characteristics associated with breast cancer survivors’ intimate partners’ needs for information and support after primary breast cancer treatment. J Psychosoc Oncolin press
• [40]Vandelanotte C, Mummery WK: Qualitative and quantitative research into the development and feasibility of a video-tailored physical activity intervention. Int J Behav Nutr Phy 2011, 8:70-81. BioMed Central Full Text
• [41]Høybye MT, Dalton SO, Christensen J, Ross L, Kuhn KG, Johansen C: Social and psychological determinants of participation in Internet-based cancer support groups. Support Care Cancer 2009, 18:553-560.
• [42]Shaw BR, Hawkins R, Arora N, McTavish F, Pingree S, Gustafson DH: An exploratory study of predictors of participation in a computer support group for women with breast cancer. CIN 2006, 24:18-27.
• [43]Lee SY, Hawkins R: Why do patients seek an alternative channel? The effects of unmet needs on patients’ health-related Internet use. J Health Comun 2010, 15:152-166.
• [44]Brug J, Steenhuis I, van Assema P, De Vries H: The impact of a computer-tailored nutrition intervention. Prev Med 1996, 25:236-242.
• [45]Brug J, Glanz K, van Assema P, Kok G, van Breukelen GJ: The impact of computer-tailored feedback and iterative feedback on fat, fruit and vegetable intake. Health Educ Behav 1998, 25:517-531.