A systematic review of psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life of people with cancer and their family caregivers.
Israel Gabriel, Debra Creedy, Elisabeth Coyne
PMID 32802350WHAT IT FOUND
Psychosocial interventions for cancer patients and caregivers showed mixed effects on quality of life.
Telephone-delivered interventions appeared most beneficial, but nine of twelve included studies were rated as weak quality, preventing firm conclusions about effectiveness.
Key findings
01Nine of the twelve included studies were rated as weak quality, primarily due to selection bias and lack of blinding.
02Telephone-delivered interventions showed a positive effect compared with other delivery methods, though this finding is based on weak evidence.
03Effects on quality of life domains were inconsistent: three of six studies reporting overall quality of life found significant positive changes, while the other three found none.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Nine of the twelve included studies were rated as weak quality, largely due to selection bias and lack of blinding. The review could not perform a meta-analysis due to heterogeneity, so findings are narrative and less precise. All included studies were conducted in developed countries, limiting applicability to low- and middle-income settings. Only half of the studies assessed spiritual well-being, leaving a major gap in the evidence for this domain. Attrition rates varied widely, with one study reporting 71% dropout, which may bias results.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflict of interest. The study was supported by Griffith University.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that psychosocial interventions are proven to improve quality of life in cancer patients. The majority of included studies were of weak quality, and results were inconsistent across domains and studies. The apparent benefit of telephone interventions is not supported by strong evidence.