Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:12:16.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Posttraumatic growth in palliative care patients and its associations with psychological distress and quality of life

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2022

Mathieu Bernard Open the ORCID record for Mathieu Bernard [Opens in a new window] ,
Emmanuelle Poncin ,
Betty Althaus  and
Gian Domenico Borasio
Mathieu Bernard*
Affiliation:
Palliative and Supportive Care Service, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
Emmanuelle Poncin
Affiliation:
Palliative and Supportive Care Service, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
Betty Althaus
Affiliation:
Palliative and Supportive Care Service, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
Gian Domenico Borasio
Affiliation:
Palliative and Supportive Care Service, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
*
Author for correspondence: Mathieu Bernard, Palliative and Supportive Care Service, Lausanne University Hospital, Hôpital Nestlé, Avenue Pierre-Decker 5, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland. E-mail: mathieu.bernard@chuv.ch
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives

Posttraumatic growth (PTG) refers to positive psychological changes resulting from individuals’ inner struggles with traumatic events such as life-threatening illness. Although palliative care patients are confronted with their own mortality, little is known about their PTG experience. This study investigates whether PTG is an empirically relevant concept for palliative patients by assessing the prevalence and areas of growth, and examining associations with psychological distress and quality of life.

Methods

Participants were recruited in Switzerland. Using validated questionnaires, we assessed PTG (Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, PTGI), psychological distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and quality of life (McGill-Quality of Life Questionnaire – Revised). We performed descriptive analyses, Spearman correlations, and linear regressions.

Results

Fifty-five patients completed the PTGI, 44% of whom experienced no/low growth, 47% moderate growth, and 9% high/very high growth. Participants experienced the greatest positive changes in terms of appreciating life and relating to others. We found significant negative bivariate correlations between PTG and psychological distress (r = −0.33) and between PTG and depression (r = −0.47). Linear regressions showed that PTG is associated with depression (β = −0.468; p = 0.000), but not with anxiety or quality of life (adjusted R2 = 0.219).

Significance of results

Over half of our patients experienced moderate to very high growth, indicating that PTG is an empirically relevant psychological process in palliative care. PTG is associated with lower levels of depression, possibly as those experiencing growth are more able to process past traumas and build a more positive outlook on one's life and self. By contrast, the relative independence of anxiety and PTG points to the likely coexistence of positive and negative psychological responses to trauma. The lack of association between PTG and quality of life points to the uniqueness of the PTG concept in capturing how people access deeper meaning and greater appreciation of life along the path toward posttraumatic self-reconstruction.

Keywords

Palliative carePosttraumatic growthPsychological distressQuality of lifeTrauma
Type
Original Article
Information
Palliative & Supportive Care , Volume 20 , Issue 6 , December 2022 , pp. 846 - 853
Check for updates
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Introduction

In the mid-1990s, the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders introduced serious illness as a potential traumatic stressor. The announcement of a life-threatening diagnosis, painful experiences, debilitating treatment side-effects and the knowledge of a poor prognosis can indeed be experienced as traumas, understood here as “life-altering” events that deeply challenge, even “shatter” people's sense of self and core beliefs (Janoff-Bulman, Reference Janoff-Bulman1992; World Health Organization, 1992; Mundy and Baum, Reference Mundy and Baum2004; Cordova et al., Reference Cordova, Riba and Spiegel2017; Tedeschi et al., Reference Tedeschi, Shakespeare-Finch and Taku2018). While illness-related traumas differ from those induced by natural or man-made disasters, insofar as they can be internal and repeated (multiple chronic stressors), empirical research suggests that individuals are likely to experience major psychological changes, whether negative or positive, in response to the trauma of illness (Sumalla et al., Reference Sumalla, Ochoa and Blanco2009; Swartzman et al., Reference Swartzman, Booth and Munro2017).

People with long-term illnesses are estimated to be two to three times more likely to experience psychological distress or mental health issues than the general population (Naylor et al., Reference Naylor, Parsonage and McDaid2012). Recent studies suggest that one in two cancer patients experiences high levels of psychological distress, and that up to a third of cancer patients or survivors experience posttraumatic stress disorder (Abbey et al., Reference Abbey, Thompson and Hickish2015; Arnaboldi et al., Reference Arnaboldi, Riva and Crico2017; Swartzman et al., Reference Swartzman, Booth and Munro2017; Mehnert et al., Reference Mehnert, Hartung and Friedrich2018). Similarly, posttraumatic disorders affect between 9% and 27% of intensive care survivors (Jones et al., Reference Jones, Bäckman and Capuzzo2007; Battle et al., Reference Battle, James and Bromfield2017; Hatch et al., Reference Hatch, Young and Barber2018; Askari Hosseini et al., Reference Askari Hosseini, Arab and Karzari2021), and up to 74% of people with HIV (Sherr et al., Reference Sherr, Nagra and Kulubya2011).

Overtime, the inner battles and struggles following trauma may instigate a process of transformative, positive psychological changes known as posttraumatic growth or PTG (Joseph and Linley, Reference Joseph and Linley2005; Calhoun and Tedeschi, Reference Calhoun and Tedeschi2013). In PTG theory, these changes may unfold in individuals’ sense of personal strength, how they relate to others, their openness to new possibilities in life, their appreciation of life, and their spirituality. To measure these, PTG theorists have developed the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), which assesses changes in the five domains above and is, to date, the most common measure of growth. Studies using the PTGI indicate that growth is an important process for people with serious illness. For instance, between 10% and 73% of cancer patients experience moderate to high growth, as do 47% of heart disease survivors (Bluvstein et al., Reference Bluvstein, Moravchick and Sheps2013; Wu et al., Reference Wu, Kaminga and Dai2019).

Although PTG is understood as a process of positive cognitive and emotional transformation whereby individuals give deeper meaning and gain greater appreciation of life, rebuilding the shattered self entails sustained, confronting, difficult, and potentially distressing self-reflection (Stockton et al., Reference Stockton, Hunt and Joseph2011; Joseph et al., Reference Joseph, Murphy and Regel2012). As such, PTG theory posits that positive and negative psychological responses to trauma are likely to coexist, and that some forms of distress may even act as “catalysts” for growth (Calhoun and Tedeschi, Reference Calhoun and Tedeschi1998). Such insight may explain inconsistent empirical links between PTG, psychological distress, and quality of life (Tanyi et al., Reference Tanyi, Mirnics and Ferenczi2020). Reviews reveal contrasting results between distress and growth: a negative association between PTG and posttraumatic stress disorder and depression for people with HIV (Rzeszutek and Gruszczyńska, Reference Rzeszutek and Gruszczyńska2018), but a positive one between PTG and stress for cancer patients (Marziliano et al., Reference Marziliano, Tuman and Moyer2020), for instance. Similarly, empirical studies suggest that the relationship between PTG and quality of life is complex and still ill-understood in people with serious illness — with results encompassing positive, negative, null, and curvilinear relations (Tomich and Helgeson, Reference Tomich and Helgeson2012).

In the posttraumatic stress and growth literature, more acutely perceived threats have been associated with heightened psychological responses, whether positive or negative (Cordova et al., Reference Cordova, Cunningham and Carlson2001; Holbrook et al., Reference Holbrook, Hoyt and Stein2001). As highlighted in a meta-analysis, stage 4 cancer patients experienced stronger positive links between posttraumatic stress and growth than less advanced patients, which led the authors to postulate that “the more an event is perceived as threatening [ … ] the more entrenched one will become in the rapid, cyclical process of growth and stress, leading to a stronger relationship between the two constructs” (Marziliano et al., Reference Marziliano, Tuman and Moyer2020). Against this backdrop, palliative care emerges as a particularly relevant setting to investigate PTG, as patients are likely to experience a heightened sense of vulnerability, being directly confronted with the threat of impending death (Casellas-Grau et al., Reference Casellas-Grau, Ochoa and Ruini2017).

To our knowledge, only two studies have focused on PTG in palliative care patients. One highlights positive links between growth and end of life dreams and visions (Levy et al., Reference Levy, Grant and Depner2020). The other, conducted by our research team, found positive associations between gratitude and growth (Althaus et al., Reference Althaus, Borasio and Bernard2018). However, key questions of PTG prevalence and associations with psychological distress and quality of life in palliative patients remain unanswered.

To fill this gap, this study investigates whether PTG is an empirically relevant concept for palliative care patients. To do so, we first assess PTG in palliative patients, in terms of prevalence and specific areas of growth. We then investigate associations between PTG and (i) psychological distress, exploring whether people faced with the heightened threat of advanced illness might experience co-occurring growth and distress; and (ii) quality of life, the most important outcome in palliative care, whose links with PTG in those with serious illness are still ill-understood.

Methods

This cross-sectional study deployed standardized, validated questionnaires to collect quantitative data about palliative care patients, as part of a wider research project examining gratitude at the end of life (Althaus et al., Reference Althaus, Borasio and Bernard2018).

Procedure and participants

This study was conducted at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. It was approved by the hospital's ethics committee. Recruitment took place between March 2015 and January 2016 at the palliative and supportive care service, which includes an inpatient unit, a consult team, a home care team, and an outpatient clinic. The palliative care team systematically identified eligible individuals, namely palliative care patients over 18 treated for a progressive disease reducing their life expectancy, who had been clinically stable for the past 24 h. People with cognitive or psychiatric disorders impairing their decision-making capacity and those with important communication issues were excluded. A researcher (independent from the healthcare team) visited eligible patients who agreed to be contacted for this study and informed them orally and in writing. She collected the written consent of those who agreed to participate and administered standardized questionnaires in face-to-face interviews.

Measures

Socio-demographic and medical assessments

We collected socio-demographic data on age, sex, nationality, mother tongue, civil status, education level, and occupation through face-to-face interviews. The healthcare team provided us with patients’ medical data, namely main diagnosis and health status assessed through the ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) Scale of Performance Status, which describes patients’ levels of functioning and autonomy in their daily activities and physical abilities — between 0 (“Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction”) and 5 (“death”).

Posttraumatic growth: Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI)

The PTGI consists of 21 items that each describe a potential change caused by a trauma on a 6-point Likert scale, between 0 (“I did not experience this change as a result of my crisis”) and 5 (“I experienced this change to a very great degree as a result of my crisis”) (Tedeschi and Calhoun, Reference Tedeschi and Calhoun1996). The questionnaire yields a total score (0–105, α = 0.89) and intermediate scores in five subscales: “relating to others” (0–35, α = 0.78), “new possibilities” (0–25, α = 0.73), “personal strength” (0–20, α = 0.77), “spiritual change” (0–10, α = 0.61), and “appreciation of life” (0–15; α = 0.61). Higher scores reflect higher levels of PTG. We used a validated French translation of the questionnaire (Lelorain et al., Reference Lelorain, Bonnaud-Antignac and Florin2010).

The PTGI is not a diagnostic instrument and lacks established cutoffs and reporting standards (Wu et al., Reference Wu, Kaminga and Dai2019). To examine and describe the levels of PTG experienced by our participants, we drew inspiration from a study on PTG in cancer survivors (Jansen et al., Reference Jansen, Hoffmeister and Chang-Claude2011) and differentiated between no growth or low growth, moderate growth, and high to very high growth, as outlined in Table 1. Prior to administering the PTGI, we also sought to mitigate potential positivity bias by assessing overall, negative and positive subjective changes linked with the illness — through the questions: “Globally, to what extent would you say that your illness has negatively (Q1)/positively (Q2) changed your personality and/or your life?” (0–10).

Table 1. PTGI scores with corresponding degrees of growth

Quality of life: McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire – Revised (MQoL-r)

The 14-item questionnaire assesses the quality of life of people with life-threatening illnesses (Cohen et al., Reference Cohen, Sawatzky and Russell2017). It yields a total score (0–10, α = 0.87) and four subscales scores, addressing physical (0–10, α = 0.66), psychological (0–10, α = 0.85), existential (0–10, α = 0.57), and social quality of life (0–10, α = 0.71). An additional item assesses individuals’ overall, subjective quality of life. Higher scores reflect higher quality of life. The questionnaire was translated into French by the Canadian team who developed the MQoL-r.

Psychological distress: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)

The HADS consists of 14 items rated on a Likert scale yielding a total score (0–42; α = 0.73), a depression score (0–21; α = 0.73), and an anxiety score (0–21, α = 0.66) (Zigmond and Snaith, Reference Zigmond and Snaith1983). Higher scores reflect higher levels of distress. The scale was validated in French (Razavi et al., Reference Razavi, Delvaux and Farvacques1989).

Statistical analyses

We used descriptive statistics to examine participants’ socio-demographic and medical characteristics and their levels of growth, psychological distress, and quality of life. Based on the PTGI results, we further assessed the prevalence and most salient dimensions of growth. Pearson correlations were performed to explore associations between PTG (PTGI total score), quality of life, and psychological distress. Finally, we performed linear regression to examine which factor(s) could predict growth (PTGI total and subscale scores), controlling for age, sex, education level, civil status, and health status. Given the exploratory nature of this study, we used backward elimination procedures to identify the model with the best predictive value — as there is less risk of making type II errors than with the stepwise and forward methods. We also performed a Bonferroni correction (for multiple comparisons) to limit potential type I errors due to multiple comparisons — with a significance level set at p = 0.01 since we have five subscales.

We established a minimum threshold of 10–15 observations for each predictor (Bressoux, Reference Bressoux2010). To manage missing data, we calculated quality of life and PTG scores using mean imputation, as long as there was no more than one missing item per subscale (Cohen et al., Reference Cohen, Sawatzky and Russell2017). For the HADS, we calculated subscale means if at least half of the items had been answered (Bell et al., Reference Bell, Fairclough and Fiero2016). Data analysis was performed using SPSS for Windows version 24.

Results

Participants

The clinical team identified 164 patients as eligible for this study, 100 (61%) of whom were informed but did not participate, for the following reasons: unwilling to participate (26 patients), no longer a patient of the palliative care service (22), worsening psychological or cognitive problems (16), physical problems (15), emergence of other exclusion criteria (communication or not clinically stable) (11), deceased (7), and cannot be reached (3). Sixty-four patients (39%) agreed to participate, seven of whom did not provide any answer to the PTGI, and two of whom had more than one missing data per PTGI subscale. The 55 participants (34% of eligible patients) who completed the PTGI are included in this study. Their demographic and medical characteristics are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Participants’ demographic and medical characteristics (N = 55)

ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.

Descriptive analyses of PTG (including overall positive and negative illness-related changes), quality of life, and psychological distress

Considered in the light of possible score ranges, our participants’ overall mean scores reflect low to moderate levels of growth, moderate quality of life, and relatively low levels of psychological distress. They also reported moderate levels of both positive and negative changes on their personality and/or life linked with the illness (as detailed in Table 3).

Table 3. Participants’ levels of PTG, overall positive and negative changes linked with the illness, quality of life, and psychological distress (N = 55)

MQoL-r, McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire – Revised; PTGI, Posttraumatic Growth Inventory; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; SD, Standard Deviation.

Prevalence of PTG

Twenty-four (44%) participants reported no to low growth (IC: 30.5–56.7%), 26 (47%) moderate growth (IC: 34.1–60.5%), and 5 (9%) high to very high growth (IC: 1.5–16.7%).

Most salient areas of growth

When standardizing mean scores to allow for meaningful comparison, participants scored highest in the areas “appreciation of life” (14.1/20; original $\bar{x}$ = 10.6 [0–15]) and “relating to others” (13.4/20; original $\bar{x}$ = 23.4 [0–35]), followed by “personal strength” (11,4/20; same as original), “new possibilities” (10/20; original $\bar{x}$ = 12.5 [0–25]), and “spiritual change” (8/20; original $\bar{x}$ = 4 [0–10]).

Bivariate associations of PTG with psychological distress and quality of life

Table 4 shows Person correlations between growth, psychological distress, and quality of life. We found significant negative correlations between PTG and psychological distress (total HADS score), and between PTG and depression (HADS depression score). There was no significant correlation with quality of life (total and subscale scores of the MQoL-r) or with anxiety.

Table 4. Pearson correlations

PTGI, Posttraumatic Growth Inventory; MQoL-r, McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire – Revised; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

a Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.

b Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level.

Bivariate associations between positive and negative illness-related changes

Pearson correlation between reported positive and negative changes on patients’ lives and/or personalities was negative but not significant (r = −0.167, p = 0.228).

Multivariate associations of PTG with psychological distress and quality of life

We performed regression analyses on the PTGI total score and each PTGI area of growth in relation to psychological distress (HADS depression score and anxiety score) and quality of life (MQoL-r total score). The final model explains 21.9% of total variance for the PTGI total score, 40.2% of total variance in the area “appreciation of life,” 23.3% in “personal strength,” 17.4% in “new possibilities,” and 13.7% in “relating to others.” No significant model was found for “spiritual change.” As shown in Table 5, depression (HADS depression score) is the only variable associated with the PTGI (total score and subscales). It is significantly and negatively associated with the PTGI total score and with the areas “relating to others,” “personal strength,” and “life appreciation.”

Table 5. Final models from linear regression for the PTGI (total score and subscales)

CI, Confidence interval; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

The significance level is at p = 0.01 with Bonferroni correction.

Discussion

To investigate whether PTG is an empirically relevant concept for palliative care patients, this study's first aim was to assess PTG in terms of prevalence and areas of growth. We found that 44% of our participants experienced no growth or low growth, 47% moderate growth, and 9% high to very high growth. With 56% of palliative patients reporting moderate to very high PTG levels, our study reveals a prevalence level similar to that of cancer patients (46% to 73%), and higher than heart disease survivors (47%) (Bluvstein et al., Reference Bluvstein, Moravchick and Sheps2013; Wu et al., Reference Wu, Kaminga and Dai2019). Our results are particularly close to those of women with breast cancer (57–59%), adolescents and young adults with cancer (59%), and open heart surgery patients (57%) (Wu et al., Reference Wu, Kaminga and Dai2019). While PTG prevalence rates should be compared with caution, as different studies might use different cutoffs, over half of palliative patients reported experiencing significant positive changes following the trauma of their illness. About 1 in 10 of our patients experienced high to very high growth, suggesting that PTG is a process worthy of further consideration and exploration in palliative care.

With an overall PTGI mean score of 61.5, our participants experienced levels of growth similar to those of cancer survivors 3 years after diagnosis (61) and hospice patients who experienced end of life dreams and visions (64); significantly higher than non-dreaming hospice patients (50), terminal cancer patients (52), women with advanced breast cancer (44), and heart disease survivor (ranging 41–58); and lower than men with advanced cancer (76) (Mystakidou et al., Reference Mystakidou, Tsilika and Parpa2008, Reference Mystakidou, Parpa and Tsilika2015; Morris et al., Reference Morris, Shakespeare-Finch and Scott2012; Rand et al., Reference Rand, Cripe and Monahan2012; Bluvstein et al., Reference Bluvstein, Moravchick and Sheps2013; Tang et al., Reference Tang, Lin and Chen2015; Levy et al., Reference Levy, Grant and Depner2020). While our participants’ mean score is still classified as low (just under the 63 cutoff), it is located at the higher end of growth levels reported by those with serious illness.

Areas where participants experience the greatest levels of growth are “appreciation of life” and “relating to others,” mirroring the areas of positive changes identified by palliative hospice patients, patients with advanced cancer, and cancer survivors (Moore et al., Reference Moore, Gamblin and Geller2011; Morris et al., Reference Morris, Shakespeare-Finch and Scott2012; Levy et al., Reference Levy, Grant and Depner2020). As shown by a grounded theory study with breast cancer patient, serious illness can lead people to feel more grateful for and appreciate “the small, intangible things in life” (Zhai et al., Reference Zhai, Weller-Newton and Shimoinaba2021). Indeed, appreciation, defined as acknowledging the value and meaning of something (event, person, behavior, or object) and feeling a positive emotional connection to it, is a core concept of gratitude (Adler and Fagley, Reference Adler and Fagley2005; Rusk et al., Reference Rusk, Vella-Brodrick and Waters2016), which is also strongly and positively linked with PTG, as shown in our previous publication (Althaus et al., Reference Althaus, Borasio and Bernard2018). Recognizing the fragility of life, some people also make a conscious decision to enjoy every moment they live; in the word of a participant: “No matter how long you live, what counts the most is how happy you are in this process” (Zhai et al., Reference Zhai, Weller-Newton and Shimoinaba2021). Our findings further underline the importance of interpersonal relationships at the end of life, which were found to improve quality of life and give meaning to the lives of palliative patients (Stiefel et al., Reference Stiefel, Krenz and Zdrojewski2008; Fegg et al., Reference Fegg, Kogler and Brandstatter2010; Giovannetti et al., Reference Giovannetti, Pietrolongo and Giordano2016; Bernard et al., Reference Bernard, Berchtold and Strasser2020).

The second aim of this study was to explore associations between PTG, psychological distress, and quality of life. Overall, our final model explained 21.9% of the PTG total score variance and between 13.7% and 40.2% of variance for single PTG areas. Our results indicate that PTG is linked with psychological distress in an ambivalent way, presenting a significant negative association with depression, but only a weak, non-significant association with anxiety. These findings partly echo results from a recent meta-analysis in oncology, with 45% of reviewed articles focusing on depression highlighting a negative association with PTG, against 25% of reviewed articles focusing on anxiety (Casellas-Grau et al., Reference Casellas-Grau, Ochoa and Ruini2017).

Such results suggest that moderate to very high growth is associated with lower levels of depression, possibly because those experiencing growth are able to adequately process past traumas and build a stronger, more positive sense of self and life narrative overtime. When considering the ensemble hypothesis on human cognitive abilities (Kellogg et al., Reference Kellogg, Chirino and Gfeller2020), depressive disorders are associated with excessively pessimistic explanatory styles and persistent negative rumination. Thereby, people tend to focus on and blame themselves for negative past experiences, leading to difficulties in imagining a positive future. Based on our results, we could hypothesize that experiencing PTG processes — gaining a greater appreciation of life or developing better relationships, for instance — lessen such pessimistic, self-blaming outlook. Such interpretation finds support in longitudinal studies, which found that overtime, PTG is a predictor of lower levels of depression (Tanyi et al., Reference Tanyi, Mirnics and Ferenczi2020). As proposed in PTG theory, growth might be best understood as an initially challenging, difficult process of self-introspection and reconstruction, from which positive psychological effects may emerge in the long run.

That is not to say that growth replaces or roots out negative psychological processes. Indeed, the non-significance of the negative association between positive and negative changes reported by our participants supports one of the key postulates in PTG theory, namely that positive and negative psychological responses to trauma are likely to coexist, and that mental “health” and “illness” evolve on two linked but distinct continua (Westerhof and Keyes, Reference Westerhof and Keyes2010). This might further help to explain the lack of a clear correlation between PTG and anxiety, which is characterized by an excessive anticipation of danger, alongside anticipation of positive future events (Miloyan et al., Reference Miloyan, Pachana and Suddendorf2014; Pomerantz and Rose, Reference Pomerantz and Rose2014). Faced with the heightened threat of advanced illness, people may thus simultaneously experience deep appreciation of the present moment and strong worrying about their future.

Our results further indicate that PTG is not associated with quality of life. This is aligned with findings from young adult cancer survivors and colorectal and hepatobiliary carcinoma cancer patients, but differ from results in breast cancer patients, for whom the two dimensions are positively associated (Casellas-Grau et al., Reference Casellas-Grau, Ochoa and Ruini2017). One possible explanation for this lack of association is that at the end of life, other dimensions could “override” PTG processes in determining quality of life — such as relationships, a quality of life area where our participants scored particularly high. Overall, our findings underline the importance and uniqueness of the PTG concept in understanding the experience of those living with serious illness, capturing how they may give deeper meaning and gain greater appreciation of life in the aftermath of trauma — which is different from assessing one's own, current life as good or satisfying through a questionnaire like the MQoL-r (Tedeschi et al., Reference Tedeschi, Calhoun, Groleau and Joseph2015).

This study has several limitations. Firstly, the PTGI has been criticized for occasionally eliciting responses that reflect “defensive” growth geared towards maintaining self-esteem and control, rather than “true” growth (Zoellner and Maercker, Reference Zoellner and Maercker2006; Calhoun and Tedeschi, Reference Calhoun and Tedeschi2013). Secondly, we cannot infer causal relationships based on a cross-sectional design, which is an important limitation when investigating a transformational process like PTG. Thirdly, our relatively small sample size resulted in low statistical power and limited generalizability. As such, we were not able to explore potential associations between growth and quality of life subscales — although it would have been particularly interesting to investigate potential links between the PTG area “relating to others” and social quality of life, both of which explore aspects of participants’ relationships, such as communication, support, and compassion. Fourthly, the application of our exclusion criteria, coupled with people's refusal or inability to participate, resulted in a low participation rate — a frequent occurrence in palliative care studies. This may have induced a selection bias, with better-off patients more likely to participate than those experiencing higher levels of psychological or physical distress (White and Hardy, Reference White and Hardy2010). Finally, we did not collect data on posttraumatic stress disorder, which would have given us a more complete picture of the positive and negative responses to trauma in palliative patients. We also lack data on participants’ religious and spiritual beliefs, which would have provided context to the PTGI spiritual subscale results, and information on what people experienced as trauma and when it occurred, which could have helped to make sense of results on growth intensity and on the nature of illness-related trauma.

To gain a better understanding of the dynamic nature of PTG, future research could adopt longitudinal designs to investigate the psychological trajectories of patients overtime, in terms of both distress and growth. In addition, in order to overcome the biases inherent to the use of self-report questionnaires, future research could explore growth through patients’ autobiographical life narratives (McAdams, Reference McAdams2001; Wengraf, Reference Wengraf2001). This approach, which builds upon narratives of identity and personality development, presents an interesting new perspective for examining the cognitive and emotional processes and determinants of PTG.

Conclusion

Fifty-six percent of study participants reported moderate to very high PTG levels. We believe that this makes PTG a process worthy of further consideration and exploration in the context of palliative care. Moreover, this study uncovered a significant negative association between growth and depression. These results highlight the importance of considering PTG in the psychological care of palliative patients, which offers the possibility of “living a life at a deeper level of personal, interpersonal, and spiritual awareness” (Tedeschi et al., Reference Tedeschi, Calhoun, Groleau and Joseph2015). Interventions geared towards fostering growth, including narrative and expressive therapies (Calhoun and Tedeschi, Reference Calhoun and Tedeschi2013), may thus represent promising avenues to improve the experience of individuals in palliative care. To maximize the potential of such interventions, we must first gain a better understanding of the patterns and dynamics underlying PTG processes. A study utilizing a life narrative approach to this effect is currently in preparation.

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank the Leenaards Foundation for their financial support, and Prof André Berchtold, from the University of Lausanne Institute of Psychology, for his precious advice on statistical analyses. We are extremely grateful to the people who accepted to take part in this study.

Funding

This study was partly funded by the Leenaards Foundation (as part of the call for projects “Quality of life for the elderly”, grant number 3961/ss).

Conflict of interest

The authors declared none.

Footnotes

*

Mathieu Bernard and Emmanuelle Poncin contributed equally to this work.

References

REFERENCES

Abbey, G, Thompson, SB, Hickish, T, et al. (2015) A meta-analysis of prevalence rates and moderating factors for cancer-related post-traumatic stress disorder. Psycho-Oncology 24(4), 371–381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adler, MG and Fagley, NS (2005) Appreciation: Individual differences in finding value and meaning as a unique predictor of subjective well-being. Journal of Personality 73(1), 79–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Althaus, B, Borasio, GD and Bernard, M (2018) Gratitude at the end of life: A promising lead for palliative care. Journal of Palliative Medicine 21(11), 1566–1572.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnaboldi, P, Riva, S, Crico, C, et al. (2017) A systematic literature review exploring the prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder and the role played by stress and traumatic stress in breast cancer diagnosis and trajectory. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press) 9, 473–485.Google ScholarPubMed
Askari Hosseini, SM, Arab, M, Karzari, Z, et al. (2021) Post-traumatic stress disorder in critical illness survivors and its relation to memories of ICU. Nursing in Critical Care 26(2), 102–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battle, CE, James, K, Bromfield, T, et al. (2017) Predictors of post-traumatic stress disorder following critical illness: A mixed methods study. Journal of the Intensive Care Society 18(4), 289–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, ML, Fairclough, DL, Fiero, MH, et al. (2016) Handling missing items in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS): A simulation study. BMC Research Notes 9, 479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernard, M, Berchtold, A, Strasser, F, et al. (2020) Meaning in life and quality of life: Palliative care patients versus the general population. BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2020-002211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bluvstein, I, Moravchick, L, Sheps, D, et al. (2013) Posttraumatic growth, posttraumatic stress symptoms and mental health among coronary heart disease survivors. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings 20(2), 164–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bressoux, P (2010) Modélisation statistique appliquée aux sciences sociales. Louvain-la-Neuve: De Boeck Supérieur.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calhoun, LG and Tedeschi, RG (1998) Beyond recovery from trauma: Implications for clinical practice and research. Journal of Social Issues 54(2), 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calhoun, LG and Tedeschi, RG (2013) Posttraumatic Growth in Clinical Practice. New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; US.Google Scholar
Casellas-Grau, A, Ochoa, C and Ruini, C (2017) Psychological and clinical correlates of posttraumatic growth in cancer: A systematic and critical review. Psycho-Oncology 26(12), 2007–2018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, SR, Sawatzky, R, Russell, LB, et al. (2017) Measuring the quality of life of people at the end of life: The McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire–Revised. Palliative Medicine 31(2), 120–129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cordova, MJ, Cunningham, LLC, Carlson, CR, et al. (2001) Posttraumatic growth following breast cancer: A controlled comparison study. Health Psychology 20(3), 176–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cordova, MJ, Riba, MB and Spiegel, D (2017) Post-traumatic stress disorder and cancer. Lancet Psychiatry 4(4), 330–338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fegg, MJ, Kogler, M, Brandstatter, M, et al. (2010) Meaning in life in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis 11(5), 469–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giovannetti, AM, Pietrolongo, E, Giordano, A, et al. (2016) Individualized quality of life of severely affected multiple sclerosis patients: Practicability and value in comparison with standard inventories. Quality of Life Research 25(11), 2755–2763.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatch, R, Young, D, Barber, V, et al. (2018) Anxiety, depression and post traumatic stress disorder after critical illness: A UK-wide prospective cohort study. Critical Care 22(1), 310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holbrook, TL, Hoyt, DB, Stein, MB, et al. (2001) Perceived threat to life predicts posttraumatic stress disorder after major trauma: Risk factors and functional outcome. Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care 51(2), 287–292; discussion 292–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Janoff-Bulman, R (1992) Shattered Assumptions: Towards a New Psychology of Trauma. New York, NY: Free Press; US.Google Scholar
Jansen, L, Hoffmeister, M, Chang-Claude, J, et al. (2011) Benefit finding and post-traumatic growth in long-term colorectal cancer survivors: Prevalence, determinants, and associations with quality of life. British Journal of Cancer 105(8), 1158–1165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, C, Bäckman, C, Capuzzo, M, et al. (2007) Precipitants of post-traumatic stress disorder following intensive care: A hypothesis generating study of diversity in care. Intensive Care Medicine 33(6), 978–985.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joseph, S and Linley, P (2005) Positive adjustment to threatening events: An organismic valuing theory of growth through adversity. Review of General Psychology 9(3), 262–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, S, Murphy, D and Regel, S (2012) An affective-cognitive processing model of post-traumatic growth. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy 19(4), 316–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kellogg, RT, Chirino, CA and Gfeller, JD (2020) The complex role of mental time travel in depressive and anxiety disorders: An ensemble perspective. Frontiers in Psychology 11, 1465. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lelorain, S, Bonnaud-Antignac, A and Florin, A (2010) Long term posttraumatic growth after breast cancer: Prevalence, predictors and relationships with psychological health. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings 17(1), 14–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levy, K, Grant, PC, Depner, RM, et al. (2020) End-of-life dreams and visions and posttraumatic growth: A comparison study. Journal of Palliative Medicine 23(3), 319–324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marziliano, A, Tuman, M and Moyer, A (2020) The relationship between post-traumatic stress and post-traumatic growth in cancer patients and survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psycho-Oncology 29(4), 604–616.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McAdams, DP (2001) The psychology of life stories. Review of General Psychology 5(2), 100–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehnert, A, Hartung, TJ, Friedrich, M, et al. (2018) One in two cancer patients is significantly distressed: Prevalence and indicators of distress. Psycho-Oncology 27(1), 75–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miloyan, B, Pachana, NA and Suddendorf, T (2014) The future is here: A review of foresight systems in anxiety and depression. Cognition & Emotion 28(5), 795–810.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, AM, Gamblin, TC, Geller, DA, et al. (2011) A prospective study of posttraumatic growth as assessed by self-report and family caregiver in the context of advanced cancer. Psycho-Oncology 20(5), 479–487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, BA, Shakespeare-Finch, J and Scott, JL (2012) Posttraumatic growth after cancer: The importance of health-related benefits and newfound compassion for others. Supportive Care in Cancer 20(4), 749–756.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mundy, E and Baum, A (2004) Medical disorders as a cause of psychological trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 17(2), 123–127.Google Scholar
Mystakidou, K, Tsilika, E, Parpa, E, et al. (2008) Personal growth and psychological distress in advanced breast cancer. Breast 17(4), 382–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mystakidou, K, Parpa, E, Tsilika, E, et al. (2015) Self-efficacy and its relationship to posttraumatic stress symptoms and posttraumatic growth in cancer patients. Journal of Loss and Trauma 20(2), 160–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naylor, C, Parsonage, M, McDaid, D, et al. (2012) Long-Term Conditions and Mental Health: The Cost of Co-Morbidities. London, UK: The King's Fund Centre for Mental Health.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, AM and Rose, P (2014) Is depression the past tense of anxiety? An empirical study of the temporal distinction. International Journal of Psychology 49(6), 446–452.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rand, KL, Cripe, LD, Monahan, PO, et al. (2012) Illness appraisal, religious coping, and psychological responses in men with advanced cancer. Supportive Care in Cancer 20(8), 1719–1728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Razavi, D, Delvaux, N, Farvacques, C, et al. (1989) Validation de la version française du HADS dans une population de patients cancéreux hospitalisés [Validation of the French version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in a population of hospitalized cancer patients]. Revue de Psychologie Appliquée 39(4), 295–307.Google Scholar
Rusk, RD, Vella-Brodrick, DA and Waters, L (2016) Gratitude or gratefulness? A conceptual review and proposal of the system of appreciative functioning. Journal of Happiness Studies: An Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being 17(5), 2191–2212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rzeszutek, M and Gruszczyńska, E (2018) Posttraumatic growth among people living with HIV: A systematic review. Journal of Psychosomatic Research 114, 81–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherr, L, Nagra, N, Kulubya, G, et al. (2011) HIV infection associated post-traumatic stress disorder and post-traumatic growth – A systematic review. Psychology, Health & Medicine 16(5), 612–629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stiefel, F, Krenz, S, Zdrojewski, C, et al. (2008) Meaning in life assessed with the “Schedule for Meaning in Life Evaluation” (SMiLE): A comparison between a cancer patient and student sample. Supportive Care in Cancer 16(10), 1151–1155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stockton, H, Hunt, N and Joseph, S (2011) Cognitive processing, rumination, and posttraumatic growth. Journal of Traumatic Stress 24(1), 85–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sumalla, EC, Ochoa, C and Blanco, I (2009) Posttraumatic growth in cancer: Reality or illusion? Clinical Psychology Review 29(1), 24–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swartzman, S, Booth, JN, Munro, A, et al. (2017) Posttraumatic stress disorder after cancer diagnosis in adults: A meta-analysis. Depression and Anxiety 34(4), 327–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tang, ST, Lin, KC, Chen, JS, et al. (2015) Threatened with death but growing: Changes in and determinants of posttraumatic growth over the dying process for Taiwanese terminally ill cancer patients. Psycho-Oncology 24(2), 147–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tanyi, Z, Mirnics, Z, Ferenczi, A, et al. (2020) Cancer as a source of posttraumatic growth: A brief review. Psychiatr Danub 32(Suppl 4), 401–411.Google ScholarPubMed
Tedeschi, RG and Calhoun, LG (1996) The posttraumatic growth inventory: Measuring the positive legacy of trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress 9(3), 455–472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tedeschi, RG, Calhoun, LG and Groleau, JM (2015) Clinical applications of posttraumatic growth. In Joseph, S (ed.), Positive Psychology in Practice. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, pp. 503–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tedeschi, RG, Shakespeare-Finch, J, Taku, K, et al. (2018) Posttraumatic Growth: Theory, Research, and Applications. New-York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomich, PL and Helgeson, VS (2012) Posttraumatic growth following cancer: Links to quality of life. Journal of Traumatic Stress 25(5), 567–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wengraf, T (2001) Qualitative Research Interviewing: Biographic Narrative and Semi-Structured Methods. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westerhof, GJ and Keyes, CLM (2010) Mental illness and mental health: The two continua model across the lifespan. Journal of Adult Development 17(2), 110–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
White, C and Hardy, J (2010) What do palliative care patients and their relatives think about research in palliative care? – A systematic review. Supportive Care in Cancer 18(8), 905–911.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization (1992) The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Wu, X, Kaminga, AC, Dai, W, et al. (2019) The prevalence of moderate-to-high posttraumatic growth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders 243, 408–415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhai, J, Weller-Newton, JM, Shimoinaba, K, et al. (2021) Transforming their lives: Post-traumatic growth experience in Chinese women with breast cancer – A grounded theory study. Health Care for Women International. doi: 10.1080/07399332.2021.1959594.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zigmond, AS and Snaith, RP (1983) The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 67(6), 361–370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zoellner, T and Maercker, A (2006) Posttraumatic growth in clinical psychology – A critical review and introduction of a two component model. Clinical Psychology Review 26(5), 626–653.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. PTGI scores with corresponding degrees of growth

Figure 1

Table 2. Participants’ demographic and medical characteristics (N = 55)

Figure 2

Table 3. Participants’ levels of PTG, overall positive and negative changes linked with the illness, quality of life, and psychological distress (N = 55)

Figure 3

Table 4. Pearson correlations

Figure 4

Table 5. Final models from linear regression for the PTGI (total score and subscales)