Top

Published in:

01-07-2015 | Original Article

Participation in questionnaire studies among couples affected by breast cancer

Authors: Helene Terp, Nina Rottmann, Pia Veldt Larsen, Mariët Hagedoorn, Henrik Flyger, Niels Kroman, Christoffer Johansen, Susanne Dalton, Dorte Gilså Hansen

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 7/2015

Abstract

Objective

Participation bias may be a problem in couple-based psychosocial studies. Therefore, it is important to investigate the characteristics associated with participation. The aim of this study was to analyze whether participation in a longitudinal psychosocial questionnaire study among couples affected by breast cancer was associated with socioeconomic, breast cancer-specific, and other health-related characteristics of the patients and partners.

Methods

The analyzes are based on 2254 couples who were invited to participate in a nationwide survey on psychosocial adjustment among couples dealing with breast cancer. Participating couples (N = 792) were compared with non-participating couples (N = 1462) with regard to socioeconomic and health-related characteristics obtained from nationwide clinical and administrative registers.

Results

Associations were seen between various socioeconomic variables and couple participation. The patient characteristics older age (OR = 0.15 [95 % CI = 0.07–0.55]), low education (OR = 1.95 [95 % CI = 1.46–2.68]), disability pension (OR = 0.59 [95 % CI = 0.39–0.55]), or non-western ethnicity (OR = 0.36 [95 % CI = 0.15–0.82]) reduced couple participation. The partner characteristics older age (OR = 0.23 [95 % CI = 0.15–0.43]), low education (OR = 1.67 [95 % CI = 1.25–2.22]), receiving disability pension (OR = 0.46 [95 % CI = 0.25–0.82]), non-western ethnicity (OR = 0.17 [95 % CI = 0.06–0.49]), or high morbidity (OR = 0.76 [95 % CI = 0.60–0.96]) also reduced couple participation. Furthermore, couples with low income (OR = 1.49 [95 % CI = 1.16–1.95]) had reduced participation. No associations were found between couple participation and breast cancer-related variables.

Conclusions

Socioeconomic characteristics of patients and partners, and morbidity of partners may influence participation in couple-based psychosocial breast cancer research. Breast cancer-related characteristics do not seem to influence participation.

Desantis C, Ma J, Bryan L, Jemal A (2014) Breast cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 64:52–62. doi:10.3322/caac.21203 CrossRefPubMed

Hagedoorn M, Sanderman R, Bolks HN, Tuinstra J, Coyne JC (2008) Distress in couples coping with cancer: a meta-analysis and critical review of role and gender effects. Psychol Bull 134:1–30. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.1 CrossRefPubMed

Fergus KD, Gray RE (2009) Relationship vulnerabilities during breast cancer: Patient and partner perspectives. Psycho-Oncology 18:1311–1322. doi:10.1002/pon.1555 CrossRefPubMed

Hagedoorn M, Buunk BP, Kuijer RG, Wobbes T, Sanderman R (2000) Couples dealing with cancer: Role and gender differences regarding psychological distress and quality of life. Psycho-Oncology 9:232–242CrossRefPubMed

Heins M, Schellevis F, Rijken M, Donker G, van der Hoek L, Korevaar J (2013) Partners of cancer patients consult their GPs significantly more often with both somatic and psychosocial problems. Scand J Prim Health Care 31:203–208. doi:10.3109/02813432.2013.861153 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Nakaya N, Saito-Nakaya K, Bidstrup PE, Dalton SO, Frederiksen K, Steding-Jessen M et al (2010) Increased risk of severe depression in male partners of women with breast cancer. Cancer 116:5527–5534. doi:10.1002/cncr.25534 CrossRefPubMed

Galea S, Tracy M (2007) Participation rates in epidemiologic studies. Ann Epidemiol 17:643–653CrossRefPubMed

Dagan M, Hagedoorn M (2013) Response rates in studies of couples coping with cancer: a systematic review. Health Psychol. doi:10.1037/hea0000013 PubMed

Davern M (2013) Nonresponse rates are a problematic indicator of nonresponse bias in survey research. Health Serv Res 48:905–912. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12070 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

10.

Bolger N, Foster M, Vinokur AD, Ng R (1996) Close relationships and adjustment to a life crisis: the case of breast cancer. J Pers Soc Psychol 70:283–294CrossRefPubMed

11.

Christie K, Meyerowitz B, Stanton A, Rowland J, Ganz P (2013) Characteristics of breast cancer survivors that predict partners' participation in research. Ann Behav Med 03/01:1–7. doi:10.1007/s12160-013-9477-7

12.

Baider L, Andritsch E, Goldzweig G, Uziely B, Ever-Hadani P, Hofman G et al (2004) Changes in psychological distress of women with breast cancer in long-term remission and their husbands. Psychosomatics 45:58–68CrossRefPubMed

13.

Pedersen CB (2011) The Danish civil registration system. Scandinavian J Pub Health 39:22–25. doi:10.1177/1403494810387965 CrossRef

14.

Moller S, Jensen MB, Ejlertsen B, Bjerre KD, Larsen M, Hansen HB et al (2008) The clinical database and the treatment guidelines of the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG); its 30-years experience and future promise. Acta Oncol 47:506–524. doi:10.1080/02841860802059259 CrossRefPubMed

15.

DBCG. Kvalitetsindikatorrapport for Brystkræft. Landsdækkende Klinisk Kvalitetsdatabase for Brystkræft: DBCG | Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group; 2012. Available from: http://www.dbcg.dk/PDF%20Filer/DBCG_rapport_2012.pdf. May 2014.

16.

Thygesen LC, Daasnes C, Thaulow I, Brønnum-Hansen H (2011) Introduction to Danish (nationwide) registers on health and social issues: Structure, access, legislation, and archiving. Scandinavian J Pub Health 39:12–16CrossRef

17.

Dalton SO, Steding-Jessen M, Gislum M, Frederiksen K, Engholm G, Schuz J (2008) Social inequality and incidence of and survival from cancer in a population-based study in Denmark, 1994–2003: Background, aims, material and methods. Eur J Cancer 44:1938–1949. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2008.06.010 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Lynge E, Sandegaard JL, Rebolj M (2011) The Danish national patient register. Scandinavian J Pub Health 39:30–33. doi:10.1177/1403494811401482 CrossRef

19.

Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis 40:373–383CrossRefPubMed

20.

Sarfati D (2012) Review of methods used to measure comorbidity in cancer populations: no gold standard exists. J Clin Epidemiol 65:924–933. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.02.017 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Kildemoes HW, Sorensen HT, Hallas J (2011) The Danish national prescription registry. Scandinavian J Pub Health 39:38–41. doi:10.1177/1403494810394717 CrossRef

22.

Horowitz M, Wilner N, Alvarez W (1979) Impact of event scale: a measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med 41:209–218CrossRefPubMed

23.

Holm LV, Hansen DG, Johansen C, Vedsted P, Larsen PV, Kragstrup J et al (2012) Participation in cancer rehabilitation and unmet needs: a population-based cohort study. Support Care Cancer 20:2913–2924. doi:10.1007/s00520-012-1420-0 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

24.

Christensen S, Zachariae R, Jensen AB, Vaeth M, Moller S, Ravnsbaek J et al (2009) Prevalence and risk of depressive symptoms 3–4 months post-surgery in a nationwide cohort study of Danish women treated for early stage breast-cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 113:339–355. doi:10.1007/s10549-008-9920-9 CrossRefPubMed

25.

Pritzkuleit R, Waldmann A, Raspe H, Katalinic A (2008) The population-based oncological health care study OVIS—Recruitment of the patients and analysis of the non-participants. BMC Cancer 8:311. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-8-311 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

26.

Sears SR, Stanton AL, Kwan L, Krupnick JL, Rowland JH, Meyerowitz BE et al (2003) Recruitment and retention challenges in breast cancer survivorship research: Results from a multisite, randomized intervention trial in women with early stage breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 12:1087–1090

27.

Würtzen H, Dalton SO, Andersen KK, Elsass P, Flyger HL, Sumbundu A et al (2013) Who participates in a randomized trial of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) after breast cancer? A study of factors associated with enrollment among Danish breast cancer patients. Psycho-Oncology 22:1180–1185. doi:10.1002/pon.3094 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Lundh MH, Lampic C, Nordin K, Ahlgren J, Bergkvist L, Lambe M et al (2013) Changes in health-related quality of life by occupational status among women diagnosed with breast cancer-a population-based cohort study. Psycho-Oncology. doi:10.1002/pon.3285 PubMed

29.

Geller BM, Mace J, Vacek P, Johnson A, Lamer C, Cranmer D (2011) Are cancer survivors willing to participate in research? J Community Health 36:772–778. doi:10.1007/s10900-011-9374-6 CrossRefPubMed

30.

Boesen E, Boesen S, Christensen S, Johansen C (2007) Comparison of participants and non-participants in a randomized psychosocial intervention study among patients with malignant melanoma. Psychosomatics 48:510–516CrossRefPubMed

31.

Williams MS, Snyder DC, Sloane R, Levens J, Flynn KE, Dombeck CB et al (2013) A comparison of cancer survivors from the PROMIS study selecting telephone versus online questionnaires. Psycho-Oncology 22:2632–2635. doi:10.1002/pon.3330 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Participation in questionnaire studies among couples affected by breast cancer
Authors: Helene Terp
Nina Rottmann
Pia Veldt Larsen
Mariët Hagedoorn
Henrik Flyger
Niels Kroman
Christoffer Johansen
Susanne Dalton
Dorte Gilså Hansen
Publication date: 01-07-2015
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 7/2015
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-014-2554-z

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

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2015

Changing factors associated with parent activation after pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant

Improved patient functioning after treatment of breakthrough cancer pain: an open-label study of fentanyl buccal tablet in patients with cancer pain

Association between depressive symptoms and changes in sleep condition in the grieving process

MASCC/ESMO/EAPC survey of palliative programs

Changes in cancer patients’ personal goals in the first 6 months after diagnosis: the role of illness variables

Seroprevalence of HSV-1/2 and correlation with aggravation of oral mucositis in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region submitted to antineoplastic treatment

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer