The purpose of this study is to test the efficacy of a cognitive-existential intervention (using either an individual or a group format) to improve the existential and global quality of life of patients as compared to usual care in a population of adult non-metastatic cancer patients.
People diagnosed with cancer must learn to cope with loss of meaning and empowerment which compromises quality of life. Questions regarding "Why me?", along with universal existential concerns about death, search for meaning, and sense of control over one's life, often constitute the principal source of overall suffering. Since there is no single and identifiable cause for cancer, those existential questions are commonly observed among patients who demand specific interventions to properly address this central issue. The existential approach can be used to help patients find meaning in the midst of a crisis. It addresses a central issue of survivorship in cancer. The conceptual model explains the relation between being exposed to a stressful and traumatic life event such as cancer and the risk of progressing toward adjustment difficulties which compromises quality of life and existential integrity. Cancer constitutes a major stressor involving significant losses that confronts the person's beliefs system. A set of therapeutic strategies can help to cope with this inevitable challenge: 1) cognitive-behavioral strategies; 2) direct existential intervention; and 3) social support through supportive-expressive strategies. Adjustment first involves cognitive reframing of the perception of the situation (situational meaning). Cognitive reframing also contributes to a readjustment of personal beliefs and values (global meaning and existential dimension). Existential strategies enable to further this process by including cognitive (beliefs, sense of coherence, expectations), motivational (choice, goal setting, and goal driving) and affective dimensions. The expressive-supportive strategy promotes active listening and non-judgmental support to encourage expression of emotions. The use of these active coping strategies (meaning-based) to the threatened-life challenge enables optimization of existential and global quality of life, as opposed to employing passive strategies such as avoidance.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
513
Over the past 2 years we developed a 12-week cognitive-existential intervention consisting of 12 modules. The first three modules essentially involve cognitive and behavioral techniques proposing reinforcement of the use of active behavioral (e.g., relaxation, activation) and emotional (cognitive reframing) strategies. This content comes from classical cognitive-behavioral techniques. The next 3 modules, inspired by empirically-tested interventions further explore emotional strategies. The last six modules specifically address the existential dimension. They are adapted from logotherapy techniques, which are also empirically-based, and have been adapted to a French-Canadian culture by our team. They aim to improve meaning-based and emotional coping strategies.
This group receive the usual treatment only.
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de l'Hôtel-Dieu de Lévis
Lévis, Quebec, Canada
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
CHU de Québec - Université Laval
Québec, Canada
Existential quality of life
At every time frame, we use two questionnaires to measure the primary outcome: 1. The McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire (MQOL): 16 items plus a single-item global scale. 2. Spiritual well-being (FACIT-SP): The FACIT-SP is a sub-scale of the FACT-G (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General) and a French version of the "FACIT-SP, FACIT-Spiritual well-being scale". This questionnaire has two sub-scales: Meaning/Peace (8 items) and Faith (4 items).
Time frame: T0: Pre-intervention
Existential quality of life
Time frame: T1: Mid-intervention (6 weeks after the beginning of the intervention)
Existential quality of life
Time frame: T2: End of the intervention (12 weeks after the beginning of the intervention)
Existential quality of life
Time frame: T3: First follow-up measure (3 months after the end of the intervention)
Existential quality of life
Time frame: T4: Second follow-up measure (6 months after the end of the intervention)
Existential quality of life
Time frame: T5: Last follow-up measure (12 months after the end of the intervention)
Global quality of life
To measure the secondary outcome, The McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire (MQOL) is use at every time frames.
Time frame: T0: Pre-intervention
Global quality of life
Time frame: T1: Mid-intervention (6 weeks after the beginning of the intervention)
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
CHU de Québec - Université Laval
Québec, Canada
Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Québec, Canada
Global quality of life
Time frame: T2: End of the intervention (12 weeks after the beginning of the intervention)
Global quality of life
Time frame: T3: First follow-up measure (3 months after the end of the intervention)
Global quality of life
Time frame: T4: Second follow-up measure (6 months after the end of the intervention)
Global quality of life
Time frame: T5: Last follow-up measure (12 months after the end of the intervention)