METHOD: This systematic review used the preferred reporting items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled and quasi-experimental studies published from the establishment of the database to October 2022. Marital self-disclosure interventions were conducted with both cancer patients and their spouses. Studies published in a language other than English or Chinese, and studies below a quality grade of C were excluded. Data were extracted through a standardized data collection form, and two reviewers independently extracted and evaluated the data. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and a third reviewer adjudicated in case of disagreement. The data were synthesized by vote counting based on direction of effect according to the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) reporting guideline.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in the review. Based on quality evaluation, three studies were categorized as grade A (good), and ten studies were grade B (moderate). Seven studies reported moderate rates of participant refusal and attrition. The structure and topics of marital self-disclosure varied across different studies. The five studies had various prespecified disclosure topics, such as fear of cancer recurrence, benefit finding, and emotional distress. The overall results suggest that marital self-disclosure interventions can improve physical and psychological health, enhance marital relationships, and increase self-disclosure ability.
CONCLUSION: The limited number of studies, small sample sizes, diverse intervention strategies, and methodological heterogeneity weakened the evidence base for the effectiveness of marital self-disclosure interventions. Therefore, further high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are recommended to confirm the effectiveness of such interventions. These studies should also evaluate the interventions' long-term impact, analyze optional topics and methods, identify key features, and explore the development of the best intervention program.
METHODS: Twenty focus group discussions were conducted with 102 Asian patients with cancer from diverse sociodemographic backgrounds. Thematic analysis was performed.
RESULTS: While most participants, especially younger patients with young children, experienced intense emotional distress upon receiving a cancer diagnosis, those with a family history of cancer were relatively calm and resigned. Nonetheless, the prior negative experience with cancer in the family made affected participants with a family history less eager to seek cancer treatment and less hopeful for a cure. Although a majority viewed the presence of family members during the breaking of bad news as important, a minority opted to face it alone to lessen the emotional impact on their family members. Difficulties disclosing the news of a cancer diagnosis to loved ones also emerged as an important need. Sensitive and empathetic patient-physician communication during the breaking of news of a cancer diagnosis was stressed as paramount.
CONCLUSION: A patient-centered communication approach needs to be developed to reduce the emotional distress to patients and their families after the breaking of bad news of a cancer diagnosis. This is expected to positively affect the patients' subsequent coping skills and attitudes toward cancer, which may improve adherence to cancer therapy.
METHODS: The semi-structured interviews were audio taped, transcribed verbatim, and translated into English.
RESULTS: Thematic analysis identified four themes: 1) reason for CAM disclosure, 2) attempt to disclose CAM, 3) withdrawal from CAM disclosure, and 4) non-disclosure of CAM use. The reason for patients' disclosure of CAM use to healthcare providers is because they wanted to find information about CAM and were afraid of the interaction between the conventional medicine and CAM. Patients also disclosed the use of CAM because they were not satisfied with the conventional medicine that had caused them harm.
CONCLUSION: Effective communication between patients and health care providers is important, especially for patients who are undergoing conventional thalassemia treatment, for fear that there is an interaction between conventional treatment and CAM use.