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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2/2016

01-04-2016 | Original Article

Enabling or Cultivating? The Role of Prostate Cancer Patients’ Received Partner Support and Self-Efficacy in the Maintenance of Pelvic Floor Exercise Following Tumor Surgery

Authors: Diana Hilda Hohl, Dipl-Psych, Nina Knoll, PhD, Amelie Wiedemann, PhD, Jan Keller, MSc, Urte Scholz, PhD, Mark Schrader, MD, Silke Burkert, PhD

Published in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine | Issue 2/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To manage incontinence following tumor surgery, prostate cancer patients are advised to perform pelvic floor exercise (PFE). Patients’ self-efficacy and support from partners were shown to facilitate PFE. Whereas support may enhance self-efficacy (enabling function), self-efficacy may also cultivate support (cultivation function).

Purpose

Cross-lagged inter-relationships among self-efficacy, support, and PFE were investigated.

Method

Post-surgery patient-reported received support, self-efficacy, PFE, and partner-reported provided support were assessed from 175 couples at four times. Autoregressive models tested interrelations among variables, using either patients’ or partners’ reports of support.

Results

Models using patients’ data revealed positive associations between self-efficacy and changes in received support, which predicted increased PFE. Using partners’ accounts of support provided, these associations were partially cross-validated. Furthermore, partner-provided support was related with increases in patients’ self-efficacy.

Conclusion

Patients’ self-efficacy may cultivate partners’ support provision for patients’ PFE, whereas evidence of an enabling function of support as a predictor of self-efficacy was inconsistent.
Literature
1.
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015; 136: E359-E386.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Resendes LA, McCorkle R. Spousal responses to prostate cancer: An integrative review. Cancer Invest. 2006; 24: 192-198.CrossRefPubMed
4.
5.
Dorey G, Glazener C, Buckley B, Cochran C, Moore K. Developing a pelvic floor muscle training regimen for use in a trial intervention. Physiotherapy. 2009; 95: 199-208.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Burkert S, Knoll N, Luszczynska A, Gralla O. The interplay of dyadic and individual planning of pelvic-floor exercise in prostate-cancer patients following radical prostatectomy. J Behav Med. 2012; 35: 305-317.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Burkert S, Knoll N, Scholz U, Roigas J, Gralla O. Self-regulation following prostatectomy: Phase-specific self-efficacy beliefs for pelvic-floor exercise. Br J Health Psychol. 2012; 17: 273-293.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Sacomori C, Cardoso FL, Porto IP, Negri NB. The development and psychometric evaluation of a self-efficacy scale for practicing pelvic floor exercises. Braz J Phys Ther. 2013; 17: 336-342.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Khan CM, Iida M, Stephens MAP, et al. Spousal support following knee surgery: Roles of self-efficacy and perceived emotional responsiveness. Rehabil Psychol. 2009; 54: 28-32.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Benight CC, Bandura A. Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery: The role of perceived self-efficacy. Behav Res Ther. 2004; 42: 1129-1148.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Schwarzer R, Knoll N. Functional roles of social support within the stress and coping process: A theoretical and empirical overview. Int J Psychol. 2007; 42: 243-252.CrossRef
12.
Berkman LF, Glass T, Brissette I, Seeman TE. From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium. Soc Sci Med. 2000; 51: 843-857.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Dunkel-Schetter C, Blasband DE, Feinstein LG, Herbert TB. Elements of supportive interactions: When are attempts to help effective? In: Spacapan S, Oskamp S, eds. Helping and being helped: Naturalistic studies. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1992: 83-114.
14.
Giangrasso B, Casale S. Psychometric properties of the Medical Outcome Study Social Support Survey with a general population sample of undergraduate students. Soc Indic Res. 2014; 116: 185-197.CrossRef
15.
Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Layton JB. Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic review. PLoS Med. 2010; 7: 1-20.CrossRef
16.
DiMatteo MR. Social support and patient adherence to medical treatment: A meta-analysis. Health Psychol. 2004; 23: 207-218.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Ochsner S, Knoll N, Stadler G, et al. Interacting effects of receiving social control and social support during smoking cessation. Ann Behav Med. 2015; 49: 141-146.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Hogan BE, Linden W, Najarian B. Social support interventions: Do they work? Clin Psychol Rev. 2002; 22: 381-440.CrossRef
19.
Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman; 1997.
20.
Bastone EC, Kerns RD. Effects of self-efficacy and perceived social support on recovery-related behaviors after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Ann Behav Med. 1995; 17: 324-330.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Schwarzer R. Modeling health behavior change: How to predict and modify the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. Appl Psychol-Int Rev. 2008; 57: 1-29.
22.
Ernsting A, Knoll N, Schneider M, Schwarzer R. The enabling effect of social support on vaccination uptake via self-efficacy and planning. Psychol Health Med. 2014; 20: 239-246.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Schwarzer R, Dunkel-Schetter C, Weiner B, Woo G. Expectancies as mediators between recipient characteristics and social support intentions. In: Schwarzer R, ed. Self-efficacy: Thought control of action. Washington: Hemisphere; 1992: 65-87.
24.
Shoji K, Bock J, Cieslak R, et al. Cultivating secondary traumatic growth among healthcare workers: The role of social support and self-efficacy. J Clin Psychol. 2014; 70: 831-846.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Knoll N, Wiedemann AU, Schultze M, Schrader M, Heckhausen J. Prostate cancer patients gradually advance goals for rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy: Applying a lines-of-defense model to rehabilitation. Psychol Aging. 2014; 29: 787-792.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Knoll N, Wiedemann AU, Schrader M, et al. Calibrating independence goals and partner support: Couples adjust to functional limitations after tumor surgery. Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2015; 7: 167-187.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Keller J, Burkert S, Wiedemann AU, et al. Individual and dyadic planning predicting pelvic floor exercise among prostate cancer survivors. Rehabil Psychol. 2015; 60: 222-231.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 5th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2007.
29.
Burkert S, Scholz U, Gralla O, Roigas J, Knoll N. Dyadic planning of health-behavior change after prostatectomy: A randomized-controlled planning intervention. Soc Sci Med. 2011; 73: 783-792.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Schulz U, Schwarzer R. Social support in coping with illness: The Berlin Social Support Scales (BSSS). Diagnostica. 2003; 49: 73-82.CrossRef
31.
Wiedemann AU, Lippke S, Reuter T, et al. Prediction of stage transitions in fruit and vegetable intake. Health Educ Res. 2009; 24: 596-607.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Hautzinger M. Die CES-D Skala: Ein Depressionsmessinstrument für Untersuchungen in der Allgemeinbevölkerung [The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population]. Diagnostica. 1988; 34: 167-173.
33.
Karantanis E, Fynes M, Moore K, Stanton S. Comparison of the ICIQ-SF and 24-hour pad test with other measures for evaluating the severity of urodynamic stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2004; 15: 111-116.CrossRef
34.
Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User’s Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 1998-2012.
35.
Geiser C. Data analysis with Mplus. New York: Guilford Press; 2012.
36.
Cole DA, Maxwell SE. Testing mediational models with longitudinal data: Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. J Abnorm Psychol. 2003; 112: 558-577.CrossRefPubMed
37.
38.
Hu L, Bentler PM. Evaluating model fit. In: Hoyle RH, ed. Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1995: 76-99.
39.
MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM, Williams J. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivar Behav Res. 2004; 39: 99-128.CrossRef
40.
Gray RE, Fitch M, Phillips C, Labrecque M, Fergus K. Managing the impact of illness: The experiences of men with prostate cancer and their spouses. J Health Psychol. 2000; 5: 531-548.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Bolger N, Amarel D. Effects of social support visibility on adjustment to stress: Experimental evidence. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007; 92: 458-475.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Lüscher J, Stadler G, Ochsner S, et al. Daily negative affect and smoking after a self-set quit attempt: The role of dyadic invisible social support in a daily diary study. Br J Health Psychol. 2015.
43.
Kuijer RG, Buunk BP, Ybema JF. Justice of give-and-take in the intimate relationship: When one partner of a couple is diagnosed with cancer. Pers Relat. 2001; 8: 75-92.CrossRef
44.
Scholz U, Ochsner S, Hornung R, Knoll N. Does social support really help to eat a low-fat diet? Main effects and gender differences of received social support within the health action process approach. Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2013; 5: 270-290.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Enabling or Cultivating? The Role of Prostate Cancer Patients’ Received Partner Support and Self-Efficacy in the Maintenance of Pelvic Floor Exercise Following Tumor Surgery
Authors
Diana Hilda Hohl, Dipl-Psych
Nina Knoll, PhD
Amelie Wiedemann, PhD
Jan Keller, MSc
Urte Scholz, PhD
Mark Schrader, MD
Silke Burkert, PhD
Publication date
01-04-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Annals of Behavioral Medicine / Issue 2/2016
Print ISSN: 0883-6612
Electronic ISSN: 1532-4796
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-015-9748-6

Other articles of this Issue 2/2016

Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2/2016 Go to the issue

Original Article

Anger Expression, Momentary Anger, and Symptom Severity in Patients with Chronic Disease

Brief Report

Marital Quality Buffers the Association Between Socioeconomic Status and Ambulatory Blood Pressure

Original Article

Acute Stress Disorder Symptoms Predict All-Cause Mortality Among Myocardial Infarction Patients: a 15-Year Longitudinal Study

Original Article

Use of Salivary Diurnal Cortisol as an Outcome Measure in Randomised Controlled Trials: a Systematic Review

Original Article

Psychosocial Vulnerability, Resilience Resources, and Coping with Infertility: A Longitudinal Model of Adjustment to Primary Ovarian Insufficiency

Original Article

Being Kind to Your Future Self: Probability Discounting of Health Decision-Making