Li, Q., Xu, Y., Zhou, H., & Loke, A.Y. (2015). A couple-based complex intervention for Chinese spousal caregivers and their partners with advanced cancer: An intervention study. Psycho-Oncology. Advance online publication. 

DOI Link

Study Purpose

To evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of a couples-based coping intervention, Caring for Couples Coping with Cancer (4Cs), and to gather preliminary data on the efficacy of the intervention

Intervention Characteristics/Basic Study Process

A convenience sample of couples received the 4Cs intervention, a couples-based intervention delivered weekly for six weeks by a researcher or therapist to small groups of couples (three to eight). The couples received semistructured instruction using information via didactic instruction, group sharing and group interaction. Sessions were supplemented using the guidebook Live With Love: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst. Assessments were made at baseline and upon completing the six-week intervention.

Sample Characteristics

  • N = 117 
  • MEAN AGE = Caregivers; 56.8 years (range = 26–76 years), patients; 57.7 years (range = 26–79 years)
  • MALES: Caregivers (33%); patients (76%), FEMALES: Caregivers (67%); patients (33%)
  • KEY DISEASE CHARACTERISTICS: Gastrointestinal, lung, and urogenital cancers (55.6%, 29.9%, and 11.1%, respectively)
  • OTHER KEY SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS: Stage III and IV cancer; Chinese adult married couples

Setting

  • SITE: Single site  
  • SETTING TYPE: Inpatient  
  • LOCATION: China

Phase of Care and Clinical Applications

  • PHASE OF CARE: Multiple phases of care

Study Design

Nonrandomized, pre- and postintervention study

Measurement Instruments/Methods

  • Cancer Behavior Inventory (CBI-B)
  • Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI)
  • Cancer-Related Communication Problems (CRCP-SF12)
  • Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 
  • Benefit Finding Scale (BFS)
  • Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale (RDAS)

Results

The 4Cs cancer program for couples was easy to recruit for, had relatively low drop-out rate, and was well-tolerated by the participants. The couples showed significant increases in self-efficacy (p < 0.01), the DCI (p < 0.05), the PCS of SF12 (p < 0.05), and positive emotions on benefit finding (p < 0.05). Participants also experienced a significant decrease in overall CRCP (p < 0.05) and anxiety (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

The 4Cs program was feasible to administer to couples facing cancer and appeared to have preliminary data supporting its benefit for the emotional health and coping of couples dealing with cancer.

Limitations

  • Small sample (< 100)
  • Risk of bias (no control group)
  • Risk of bias (no random assignment)

 

Nursing Implications

The 4Cs couples-based intervention shows promise for improving couple efficacy, coping, physical health, and positive emotions. Larger, multisite, randomized, controlled trials of this intervention are needed.