PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Elisabeth J S Kunkel

Publications and source records attributed to Elisabeth J S Kunkel.

5 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

Psychosocial oncology: supportive care for the cancer patient.

Increasing attention is being paid to the emotional and psychosocial needs of cancer patients. As a result of huge advances in early detection and in treatment modalities, there now are millions of cancer survivors in the United States. There has been a realization that cancer survivors have distinct psychosocial needs. As cancer survivors live longer, reduction of psychological distress has been recognized as being an important part of having an improved quality of life. There have been numerous changes in the field of psychosocial oncology since it first began 25 years ago. Guidelines now exist for the definition of distress and decision trees are available for making the appropriate referrals. Advances in pharmacologic treatment for depression and anxiety have made it possible to decrease distress and increase coping in cancer patients undergoing treatment as well as in cancer survivors. Numerous individual and group therapies have demonstrated effectiveness in improving mood and quality of life in cancer patients and those at high risk for developing cancer. Due to the forthright efforts of cancer patients, there are now many organizations and list serves (e-mailing lists) that cancer survivors can turn to for help before, during, and after cancer treatment. Finally, with the rapid expansion of the internet not only are there websites available as resources, but also the creation of interactive online support is becoming a reality. One of the most important issues in providing supportive care to cancer patients in the future is to meet the individual needs of patients and provide the type of psychological therapy that will work best for them.

Adaptation, Psychological↗
PubMed2005

Preparing African-American men in community primary care practices to decide whether or not to have prostate cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: This study was a randomized trial to test the impact of an informed decision-making intervention on prostate cancer screening use. METHODS: The study population included 242 African-American men from three primary care practices who were 40-69 years of age and had no history of prostate cancer. Participants completed a baseline survey questionnaire and were randomly assigned either to a Standard Intervention (SI) group (N=121) or an Enhanced Intervention (EI) group (N=121). An informational booklet was mailed to both groups. EI group men were also offered a screening decision education session. Two outcomes were considered: (1) complete screening (i.e., having a digital rectal exam (DRE) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing), and (2) complete or partial screening (i.e., having a PSA test with or without DRE). An endpoint chart audit was performed six months after initial intervention contact. The data were analyzed via exact logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, screening use was low among study participants. EI group men had a screening frequency two times greater than that of SI group men, but the difference was not statistically significant: 8% vs. 4 % (OR = 1.94) fo rcomplete screening, and 19% vs. 10% (OR = 2.08) for complete or partial screening. Multivariable analyses showed that being in the EI group and primary care practice were significant predictors of complete or partial screening (OR = 3.9 and OR = 5.64, respectively). CONCLUSION: Prostate cancer screening use may be influenced by exposure to decision education and the influence of screening-related primary care practice factors.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Behaviors used by men to protect themselves against prostate cancer.

This paper reports on behaviors men use to protect themselves against prostate cancer. Data were collected via a telephone or mailed survey from 353 men enrolled in two studies of prostate cancer screening. Respondents reported behaviors they used to protect themselves against prostate cancer, and responses were coded as conventional care, self-care, or nothing. Men who reported using both conventional care and self-care were categorized as conventional care users. Polytomous logistic regression was conducted to evaluate the association between sociodemographic background, prior prostate screening, and cognitive, affective, and social support and influence factors with protective behavior type. The distribution of protective behaviors was as follows: conventional care, 63%; self-care only, 19%; and nothing, 18%. In multivariable analyses, higher education level was found to be positively associated with conventional care use. Perceived salience and coherence of prostate cancer screening was positively associated with conventional care use among men in one of the two studies. Low concern about screening was positively associated with self-care use, as was mailed survey completion. This study presents self-report data regarding prostate cancer protection behaviors. Most men in the study reported using some type of prostate cancer protective behavior. Decision-making about whether or not to take protective action and what type of behavior to use may be influenced by socioeconomic background, cognitive perceptions related to behavioral options, and concern about risk.

Adult↗