Premium
Does a regular nurse‐led distress screening and discussion improve quality of life of breast cancer patients treated with curative intent? A randomized controlled trial
Author(s) -
Ploos van Amstel Floortje K.,
Peters Marlies E. W. J.,
Donders Rogier,
SchloozVries Margrethe S.,
Polman Lenny J. M.,
Graaf Winette T. A.,
Prins Judith B.,
Ottevanger Petronella B.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
psycho‐oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.41
H-Index - 137
eISSN - 1099-1611
pISSN - 1057-9249
DOI - 10.1002/pon.5324
Subject(s) - medicine , randomized controlled trial , quality of life (healthcare) , distress , breast cancer , radiation therapy , randomization , physical therapy , intervention (counseling) , cancer , nursing , clinical psychology
Objective We performed a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to investigate whether regular screening with the distress thermometer (DT) by a nurse improved global quality of life (QOL) of patients with breast cancer (BC) treated with curative intent. Methods BC patients were randomized between regular screening for distress with a nurse‐led DT intervention (NDTI) and usual care (UC). Both groups filled out questionnaires at baseline, after each received treatment modality and at follow‐up visits up to 2 years. At these points, the intervention group received also the NDTI. The primary outcome was the global QOL of the EORTC QLQ C30 at 2 years after the end of treatment. Analyses were done on an intention‐to‐treat basis, using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), generalized least squares, and interaction analyses. Results Of 194 randomized patients, 153 filled out the questionnaires up to 2 years after treatment. There was no significant difference between NDTI and UC in global QOL 2 years after the end of treatment (mean diff. = –1∙273, P = .610; 95% CI [−6.195; 3.649]). Subgroup analysis of patients who received multimodality treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, n = 66) showed a significant between‐group difference in global QOL over time (mean diff. = –10, P < .001; 95% CI [−14.835; −5.167]) together with other secondary outcome measures in favor of the NDTI. Conclusion NDTI did not lead to a significant improvement in global QOL 2 years after the end of treatment for patients with BC. However, the findings indicate that BC patients who received multimodality treatment may benefit from NDTI.