A Pilot Study To Assess Guidance in and Subsequent Use of Mind-Body Techniques on the Quality of Life of Cancer Patients
| Status: | Completed |
|---|---|
| Conditions: | Cancer |
| Therapuetic Areas: | Oncology |
| Healthy: | No |
| Age Range: | 18 - Any |
| Updated: | 4/2/2016 |
| Start Date: | May 2012 |
| End Date: | June 2012 |
| Contact: | Werner Absenger, M.Sc. |
| Email: | wa@wernerabsenger.com |
| Phone: | 616.296.0772 |
Quality of Life Outcomes Following Mind-body Skills Training for Cancer Patients That Are Facilitated Either Face-to-face or Online: A Pilot Study
Aim: To answer the questions of whether a Mind-Body Medicine (MBM) skills group facilitated
face-to-face and online can improve measures of Quality of Life (QOL) in a population of
cancer patients.
Value of Study: Technological advances have contributed to new venues for healthcare
delivery. It is imperative that these new delivery methods, for individual and/or group
psychosocial services are sufficiently tested and validated. Research shows that there is
very little knowledge about differences in communication styles between online and
face-to-face groups, nor is there much knowledge on the overall efficacy of online groups.
Phenomenon Studied: Can MBM skills groups improve the quality of life of cancer patients? Is
there a difference in outcome between a MBM skills group delivered face-to-face and a MBM
skills group delivered online.
Reasons Leading to Proposing the Project: Despite encouraging research showing that
psychosocial interventions have positive effects in the lives of cancer patients, more
research is needed due to several problems of current research, such as poor study design,
lack of use of technological advances and relatively few existing studies on the
effectiveness of MBM therapies in the oncological setting.
Stated Hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1:
There is no difference between baseline QOL measures and QOL measures at the end of
face-to-face facilitated MBM skills groups.
Hypothesis 2:
There is no difference between baseline QOL measures and QOL measures at the end of Online
facilitated MBM skills groups.
Hypothesis 3:
Participation in either, online facilitated MBM skills groups or face-to-face facilitated
MBM skills groups will improve QOL measures when compared to control group.
Hypothesis 4:
Patients in the control group (waitlist control, care as usual group) will have no
improvement on QOL measures.
Anticipated Value to the Larger Community: According to the National Center for
Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) "…there is a need for reliable, objective,
evidence-based information regarding the usefulness and safety—or lack thereof—of CAM"
(National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2011, p.3). This study will add
to general scientific knowledge of CAM and MBM.
face-to-face and online can improve measures of Quality of Life (QOL) in a population of
cancer patients.
Value of Study: Technological advances have contributed to new venues for healthcare
delivery. It is imperative that these new delivery methods, for individual and/or group
psychosocial services are sufficiently tested and validated. Research shows that there is
very little knowledge about differences in communication styles between online and
face-to-face groups, nor is there much knowledge on the overall efficacy of online groups.
Phenomenon Studied: Can MBM skills groups improve the quality of life of cancer patients? Is
there a difference in outcome between a MBM skills group delivered face-to-face and a MBM
skills group delivered online.
Reasons Leading to Proposing the Project: Despite encouraging research showing that
psychosocial interventions have positive effects in the lives of cancer patients, more
research is needed due to several problems of current research, such as poor study design,
lack of use of technological advances and relatively few existing studies on the
effectiveness of MBM therapies in the oncological setting.
Stated Hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1:
There is no difference between baseline QOL measures and QOL measures at the end of
face-to-face facilitated MBM skills groups.
Hypothesis 2:
There is no difference between baseline QOL measures and QOL measures at the end of Online
facilitated MBM skills groups.
Hypothesis 3:
Participation in either, online facilitated MBM skills groups or face-to-face facilitated
MBM skills groups will improve QOL measures when compared to control group.
Hypothesis 4:
Patients in the control group (waitlist control, care as usual group) will have no
improvement on QOL measures.
Anticipated Value to the Larger Community: According to the National Center for
Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) "…there is a need for reliable, objective,
evidence-based information regarding the usefulness and safety—or lack thereof—of CAM"
(National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2011, p.3). This study will add
to general scientific knowledge of CAM and MBM.
Inclusion Criteria:
- TNM staged tumors Stage I to Stage IV,
- Tumors staged according to the Ann Arbor staging classification system (commonly
lymphomas)
- Tumors which don't have a clear-cut staging system such as most types of leukemia and
blood or bone marrow cancers
- Tumors staged by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (cervix,
uterus, ovary, vagina, and vulva).
- No neurological illness
Exclusion Criteria:
- Mental functioning clinically estimated to be below the low average range (IQ< 80).
(Impaired cognitive level might impede verbal comprehension).
- Not being able to speak or understand English;
- No access to reliable computer with operational software to participate in online
video conferences
- Unavailability of built-in or external web-cam
- Unavailability of reliable high-speed Internet connection
- Unavailability of reliable transportation to and from face-to-face MBM skills group
meetings
- Barring unforeseen circumstances, intent to participate in each and every one of the
eight MBM Skills Groups session
We found this trial at
1
site
Click here to add this to my saved trials
