Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Cancer Survivorship
Published in: Journal of Cancer Survivorship 1/2008

01-03-2008

Does talking about their relationship affect couples’ marital and psychological adjustment to lung cancer?

Authors: Hoda Badr, Linda K. Acitelli, Cindy L. Carmack Taylor

Published in: Journal of Cancer Survivorship | Issue 1/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Relationship talk refers to talking with a partner about the relationship, what one needs from one’s partner, and/or the relationship implications of a shared stressor. This prospective study examined the effects of relationship talk on couples’ psychosocial adaptation to lung cancer.

Methods

A total of 169 patients (63% male) and 167 of their partners completed a series of questionnaires within 4-weeks of treatment initiation for newly diagnosed lung cancer (baseline). Follow-up questionnaires were administered 3 and 6 months later.

Results

Multilevel models using the couple as the unit of analysis showed that patients and partners who reported more frequent relationship talk had less distress (effect size r = 0.16) and greater marital adjustment over time (effect size r = 0.21), regardless of gender. Satisfaction with the frequency of relationship talk was associated with lower baseline distress for patients and partners (effect size r = 0.25). However, over time, greater communication regarding the relationship was related to less distress in the partner (effect size r = 0.15) than in the cancer patient.

Discussion

Expanding the study of spousal communication in cancer beyond patient cancer-related disclosures to include the effects of talking about the spousal relationship may help clarify the role of relationship processes in couples’ psychosocial adaptation. Patients and partners who begin talking about the relationship implications of lung cancer early on in their cancer experience may be better able to prepare together for the challenges they may face as cancer progresses and the patient moves toward the end-of-life.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

Results of this study underscore the need for couple-focused interventions in lung cancer that address the communication and relationship needs of both partners. Working with couples during the initial diagnosis and treatment period and emphasizing the benefits of discussing relationship issues during this time of major upheaval may facilitate couples’ successful adaptation to lung cancer.
Literature
1.
Schmidt GM, Niland JC, Forman SJ, et al. Extended follow-up in 212 long-term allogeneic bone marrow transplant survivors. Transplantation. 1993;55:551–7.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Rieker PP, Fitzgerald EM, Kalish LA. Adaptive behavioral responses to potential infertility among survivors of testis cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8:347–55.PubMed
3.
Hodges L, Humphris G, Macfarlane G. A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between the psychological distress of cancer patients and their carers. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:1–12.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Kornblith AB, Anderson J, Cella DF. Quality of life assessment of Hodgkin's disease survivors: a model for cooperative clinical trials. Oncology 1990;4:93–101.PubMed
5.
Karney B, Story L, Bradbury T. Marriages in context: Interactions between chronic and acute stress among newlyweds. Couples Coping with Stress. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association; 2005. p. 13–32.CrossRef
6.
Burman B, Margolin G. Analysis of the association between marital relationships and health problems: An interactional perspective. Psychol Bull. 1992;112:39–63.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Lichtman RR, Taylor SE, Wood JV. Social support and marital adjustment after breast cancer. J Psychosoc Oncol. 1987;5:47–74.CrossRef
8.
Zahlis EH, Shands ME. Breast cancer: Demands of the illness on the patient's partner. J Psychosoc Oncol. 1991;9:75–93.CrossRef
9.
Cleek MG, Pearson TA. Perceived Causes of Divorce: An Analysis of Interrelationships. J Marriage Fam 1985;47:179–83.CrossRef
10.
Caughlin JP. The demand/withdraw pattern of communication as a predictor of marital satisfaction over time. Unresolved issues and future directions. Human Commun Res. 2002;28:49–85.
11.
Reynolds JS, Perrin NA. Mismatches in social support and psychosocial adjustment to breast cancer. Health Psychol. 2004;23:425–30.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Manne S, Ostroff J, Winkel G, et al. Posttraumatic Growth After Breast Cancer: Patient, Partner, and Couple Perspectives. Psychosom Med. 2004;66:442–54.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Dorval M, Guay S, Mondor M, et al. Couples who get closer after breast cancer: Frequency and predictors in a prospective investigation. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3588–96.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Manne S, Ostroff J, Rini C, et al. The interpersonal process model of intimacy: The role of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and partner responsiveness in interactions between breast cancer patients and their partners. J Fam Psychol. 2004;18:589–99.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Manne S, Badr H. Intimacy and relationship processes in couples’ psychosocial adaptation to cancer. Cancer. (in press).
16.
Revenson TA. Scenes from a marriage: The coupling of support, coping, and gender within the context of chronic illness. Social psychological foundations of health and illness. London: Blackwell; 2003. p. 530–59.
17.
Manne S, Ostroff J, Sherman M, et al. Couples’ support-related communication, psychological distress and relationship satisfaction among women with early stage breast cancer. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004;72:660–70.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Manne S, Ostroff J, Norton T, et al. Cancer-related relationship communication in couples coping with early stage breast cancer. Psycho-Oncol. 2006;15:234–47.CrossRef
19.
Manne S. Intrusive thoughts and psychological distress among cancer patients: the role of spouse avoidance and criticism. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1999;67:539–46.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Manne S, Taylor KL, Dougherty J, Kerneny N. Supportive and negative responses in close relationships: Their association with psychological adjustment among individuals with cancer. J Behav Med. 1997;20:101–26.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Badr H, Carmack Taylor CL: Effects of relational maintenance on psychological distress and dyadic adjustment among couples coping with lung cancer. Health Psychology. (in press).
22.
Hagedoorn M, Kuijer RG, Buunk BP, et al. Marital satisfaction in patients with cancer: Does support from intimate partners benefit those who need it the most? Health Psychol. 2000;19:274–82.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Kornblith AB, Regan M, Kim Y, et al. Cancer-related communication between female patients and male partners scale: A pilot study. Health Psychol. 2006;15:780–94.
24.
Manne S, Zautra AJ. Spouse criticism and support: Their association with coping and psychological adjustment among women with rheumatoid arthritis. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56:608–17.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Manne S, Norton T, Ostroff J, et al. Protective buffering and psychological distress among couples coping with breast cancer: The moderating role of relationship satisfaction. J Fam Psychol. 2007;21:380–88.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Wortman CB, Dunkel-Schetter C. Interpersonal relations and cancer. J Soc Issues. 1979;35:120–55.CrossRef
27.
Pistrang N, Barker C, Rutter C. Social support as conversation: Analysing breast cancer patients’’ interactions with their partners. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45:773–82.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Figueiredo M, Fries E, Ingram K. The role of disclosure patterns and unsupportive social interactions in the well-being of breast cancer patients. Psycho-Oncol. 2004;13:96–105.CrossRef
29.
Porter L, Keefe F, Hurwitz H, Faber M. Disclosure between patients with gastrointestinal cancer and their spouses. Psycho-Oncol. 2005;14:1030–42.CrossRef
30.
Pennebaker J. Writing about emotional experiences as a therapeutic process. Psychol Sci. 1997;8:162–6.CrossRef
31.
Lepore SJ. A social-cognitive processing model of emotional adjustment to cancer. Psychosocial Interventions for Cancer. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association; 2001. p. 99–116.CrossRef
32.
Badr H, Carmack Taylor C. Social constraints and spousal communication in lung cancer. Psycho-Oncolo. 2006;15:673–83.CrossRef
33.
Harrison J, Maguire G, Pitceathly C. Confiding in crisis: Gender differences in pattern of confiding among cancer patients. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41:1255–60.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Foa EB, Steketee G, Rothbaum BO. Behavioral/cognitive conceptualizations of post-traumatic stress disorder. Behav Ther. 1989;20:155–76.CrossRef
35.
Coyne JC, Smith DAF. Couples coping with a myocardial infarction: A contextual perspective on wives’ distress. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1991;61:404–12.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Holmberg SK, Scott LL, Alexy W, Fife BL. Relationship issues of women with breast cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2001;24:53–60.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Ptacek JT, Ptacek JJ, Dodge KL. Coping with breast cancer from the perspectives of husbands and wives. J Psychosoc Oncol. 1994;12:47–72.CrossRef
38.
Douglass G. Reciprocal support in the context of cancer: Perspectives of the patient and spouse. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1997;24:1529–36.PubMed
39.
Dindia K, Canary D. Definitions and theoretical perspectives on maintaining relationships. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 1993;10:163–73.CrossRef
40.
Duck S. Steady as (s)he goes: Relational maintenance as a shared meaning system. Communication and relational maintenance. New York: Academic Press; 1994. p. 45–60.
41.
Canary D, Stafford L, Semic BA. A panel study of the associations between maintenance strategies and relational characteristics. J Marriage Fam. 2002;64:395–406.CrossRef
42.
Goldsmith D, Baxter LA. Constituting relationships in talk: A taxonomy of speech events in social and personal relationships. Human Commun Res. 1996;23:87–114.CrossRef
43.
Acitelli LK. When spouses talk to each other about their relationship. Pers Relatsh. 1988;5:185–99.CrossRef
44.
Badr H, Acitelli LK. Relationship talk and dyadic adjustment in couples coping with chronic illness. J Fam Psychol 2005;19:465–69.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Duck S. Talking relationships into being. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 1995;12:535–40.CrossRef
46.
Baxter LA, Bullis C. Turning points in developing romantic relationships. Human Commun Res. 1986;12:469–93.CrossRef
47.
Stafford L, Dainton M, Haas S. Measuring routine and strategic relational maintenance: Scale development, sex versus gender roles, and the prediction of relational characteristics. Commun Monogr. 2000;67:306–23.
48.
Acitelli LK. Relationship awareness: Crossing the bridge between cognition and communication. Commun Theory. 2002;12:92–112.CrossRef
49.
Canary D, Stafford L. Maintaining relationships through strategic and routine interaction. Communication and Relational Maintenance. San Diego, CA: Academic; 1994. p. 3–21.
50.
Acitelli LK. You, me, and us: Perspectives on relationship awareness. Understanding Relationship Processes I: Individuals and Relationships. London: Sage; 1993. p. 144–74.
51.
Zhang S, Siminoff L. Silence and cancer: Why do families fail to communicate? Health Commun. 2003;15:415–29.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Schag CA, Ganz PA, Wing DS, Sim MS, Lee JJ. Quality of life in adult survivors of lung, colon and prostate cancer. Qual Life Res. 1994;3:127–41.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Oken M, Creech R, Tormey D, et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5:649–55.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
55.
Canary D, Stafford L. Relational maintenance strategies and equity in marriage. Commun Monogr. 1992;59:243–67.
56.
Badr H. Chronic Illness As A Relationship Challenge. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Houston; 2002.
57.
Spanier GB. Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. J Marriage Fam. 1976;38:15–28.CrossRef
58.
Jacobson NS, Schmaling KB, Holzworth-Munroe A. Component analysis of behavioral marital therapy. J Marital Fam Ther. 1987;13:187–95.CrossRef
59.
Derogatis LR. Brief Symptom Inventory: Administration, scoring and procedures manual. 3rd ed. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems, Inc.; 1993.
60.
Derogatis LR, Melisaratos N. The Brief Symptom Inventory: An introductory report. Psychol Med. 1983;13:595–605.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Amenson CS, Lewinsohn PM. An investigation of observed sex differences in prevalence of unipolar depression. J Abnorm Psychol. 1981;90:1–13.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Croog SH, Levine S, Tets MA, et al. The effects of antihypertensive therapy on quality of life. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1657–64.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Zabora J, Brintzenhofeszoc K, Curbow B, Hooker C, Piantadosi S. The prevalence of psychological distress by cancer site. Psycho–Oncol. 2001;10:19–28.CrossRef
64.
Malcarne VL, Compas BE, Epping-Jordan JE, Howell DC. Cognitive factors in adjustment to cancer: Attributions of self-blame and perceptions of control. J Behav Med. 1995;18:401–17.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Gonzalez R, Griffin D. The correlational analysis of dyad-level data in the distinguishable case. Pers Relatsh. 1999;6:449–69.CrossRef
66.
Kashy DA, Kenny DA. The analysis of data from dyads and groups. Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2000. p. 451–77.
67.
Kenny D, Kashy DA, Cook D. Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford; 2006.
68.
Snijders T, Bosker R. Multilevel analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1999.
69.
Bolger N, Shrout PE. Accounting for statistical dependency in longitudinal data on dyads. In: Little TD, Bovaird JA, Card NA, editors. Modeling ecological and contextual effects in longitudinal studies of human development. Mahwah, NJ: LEA; 2007. p. 285–98.
70.
Lyons R, Mickelson KD, Sullivan M, Coyne JC. Coping as a communal process. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 1998;15:579–605.CrossRef
71.
Badr H, Acitelli LK, Carmack Taylor CL. Does couple identity mediate the stress experienced by caregiving spouses? Psychol Health. 2007;22:211–29.CrossRef
72.
Bernal G, Baker J. Toward a metacommunicational framework of couple interaction. Fam Proc. 1979;18:293–302.CrossRef
73.
Hagedoorn M, Buunk BP, Kuijer RG, Wobbes T, Sanderman R. Couples dealing with cancer: Role and gender differences regarding psychological distress and quality of life. Psycho-Oncol. 2000;9:232–42.CrossRef
74.
Coyne JC, Fiske V. Couples coping with chronic and catastrophic illness. Family Health Psychology. Washington, DC: Hemisphere; 1992. p. 129–49.
75.
Lyons R, Sullivan MJL, Ritvo P, Coyne JC, editors. Relationships in chronic illness and disability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995.
76.
Baider L, Kaufman B, Peretz T, et al. Mutuality of fate: adaptation and psychological distress in cancer patients and their partners. Cancer in the Family. Chichester: Wiley; 1996. p. 173–86.
77.
Northouse LL, Dorms G, Charron-Moore C. Factors affecting couples’ adjustment to recurrent breast cancer. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41:69–76.PubMedCrossRef
78.
Acitelli LK, Young AM. Gender and thought in relationships. Knowledge Structures and Interactions in Close Relationships: A Social Psychological Approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1996. p. 147–68.
79.
Acitelli LK, Badr H. My illness or our illness? Attending to the relationship when one partner is ill. Couples Coping with Stress: Emerging Perspectives on Dyadic Coping. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2005. p. 121–36.CrossRef
80.
de Groot JM, Mah K, Fyles A, et al. The psychosocial impact of cervical cancer among affected women and their partners. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2005;15:918–25.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Does talking about their relationship affect couples’ marital and psychological adjustment to lung cancer?
Authors
Hoda Badr
Linda K. Acitelli
Cindy L. Carmack Taylor
Publication date
01-03-2008
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Cancer Survivorship / Issue 1/2008
Print ISSN: 1932-2259
Electronic ISSN: 1932-2267
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-008-0044-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2008

Journal of Cancer Survivorship 1/2008 Go to the issue

News

Impacting the lives of cancer survivors: reflections on the first year of the journal of cancer survivorship: research and practice

OriginalPaper

Survivorship issues following treatment completion—results from focus groups with Australian cancer survivors and health professionals

OriginalPaper

Non-cancer adverse health conditions and perceived health and function among cancer survivors participating in a community-based cohort study in Washington County, Maryland

OriginalPaper

The UK Expert Patients Program: Lessons learned and implications for cancer survivors’ self-care support programs

ReviewPaper

Long term physical sequelae after adult-onset cancer

OriginalPaper

Barriers to pain assessment and management in cancer survivorship
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits