We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
With advancements in cancer treatments, the survival rates of patients with their first primary cancer (FPC) have increased, resulting in a rise in the number of patients with second primary cancer (SPC). However, there has been no assessment on the incidence of suicide among patients with SPC. This study assessed the occurrence of suicide among patients with SPC and compared them with that in patients with FPC.
Methods
This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study that followed patients with FPC and SPC diagnosed from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 17 registries database between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2019.
Results
For patients with SPC, an age of 85+ years at diagnosis was associated with a higher incidence of suicide death (HR, 1.727; 95% CI, 1.075–2.774), while the suicide death was not considerably different in the chemotherapy group (P > 0.05). Female genital system cancers (HR, 3.042; 95% CI, 1.819–6.361) accounted for the highest suicide death among patients with SPC. The suicide death distribution of patients with SPC over time indicated that suicide events mainly occurred within 5 to 15 years of diagnosis. Compared with patients with FPC, patients with SPC in general had a lower risk of suicide, but increased year by year.
Conclusion
The risk of suicide was reduced in patients with SPC compared with patients with FPC, but increased year by year. Therefore, oncologists and related health professionals need to provide continuous psychological support to reduce the incidence of suicide. The highest suicide death was found among patients with female genital system cancer.
On February 26, 2020 the Greek government established measures against the spread of COVID-19, which eventually escalated to the entire social and economic ‘lockdown’ of the state on March 23. The main message was staying home and protect the eldest who are more vulnerable to the virus.
Objectives
The aim of the present study was to test the effect of living with a vulnerable person to specific psychological factors in order to be able to create future interventions for psychological well-being of the population.
Methods
A convenient sample of 1,158 Greeks (280 males [24.2%] participated electronically during the ‘lockdown. A battery of questionnaires for stress resilience, acute stress, and satisfaction with life, well-being and effect on psychosocial health was used for the study. Analysis was performed with SPSS 24.
Results
Individuals living in the same house with a vulnerable partner of parent were found to have statistically significant higher levels in acute stress disorder (Μ=39,4±15,4) than those living without (M=37.7±15.5) (t1156=2.125 p=0.03)The same happened with the effect on psychological health with the first Group having significantly higher score in the questionnaire (M=76.6±56,9) than the second group (M=69.1±55.1) (t1156=2.330 p=0.02). Stress resilience, satisfaction with life and well-being were not affected.
Conclusions
According to our data individuals living in the same house with a vulnerable person for COVID-19 are more likely to develop acute stress and psychosocial impact. Stress reduction programs are needed in order to help this population with managing the results of the lockdown.
The COVID-19 outbreak resulted in two respective social and economic lockdowns in Greece. According to international findings pressure and instability may lead to the sense of losing control over the situation, and in retrospect to the escalation of psychosomatic symptoms for the general population.
Objectives
The present study examines whether five socio-demographic variables are significant to the variance of psychosomatic symptoms of the Greek population between the two domestic lockdowns.
Methods
192 participants, of whom 141 were females(73.4%) and 51 males(26.6%), provided their answers between October 5 and November 18, 2020 to the research team of the Psychiatric Unit of the General Public Hospital of Nikaia, ‘Ayios Panteleimon’, in Athens, Greece. The participants were asked about their (i)‘income’, (ii)‘occupation’, (iii)‘residence’, (iv)‘marital status’ and (v)‘education’. Psychosomatic symptoms were measured through the self-reported PSSQ-29 tool (Cronbach’s alpha= .955).
Results
Out of the five One-way Between-participants ANOVAs, none of the five socio-demographic variables showed any significant statistical difference in the level of psychosomatic symptoms.
Conclusions
The study provides some evidence against the protective and harmful role of the socio-demographic variables in psychosomatic health. It is noteworthy, that the conditions were not similar with previous studies. It might be possible that the COVID-19 worked as a phenomenon of mass panic for the Greek sample, and thus no socio-demographic background was either protective or harmful. In conclusion, the present study clearly highlights that none of them had any significant effect to the variance of psychosomatic symptoms for the general population.
Our aim was to identify possible patterns of change or durability in sources of meaning for family caregivers of terminally ill patients after the onset of support at home by an outreach palliative nursing team during a three-month survey period.
Method:
The Sources of Meaning and Meaning in Life Questionnaire (SoMe) was administered to 100 caregivers of terminally ill patients at four measurement timepoints: immediately before the onset of the palliative care (t0), and at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after t0. Time-dependent changes were assessed for the completed subsample (n = 24) by means of bivariate linear as well as quadratic regression models. Multivariate regressions with dimensions of meaning in life as dependent variables were performed for the whole sample by means of random-effects models: dependent variables changed over time (four timepoints), whereas regressors remained constant.
Results:
No significant differences were found for psychosocial and clinical variables or for sources of meaning between the uncompleted and completed subsamples. Growth curve analyses revealed no statistically significant but tendentiously parabolic changes for any dimensions or for single sources of meaning. In multivariate models, a negative association was found between patient age, psychological burden of family caregivers, and changes in total SoMe score, as well as for the superordinate dimensions.
Significance of Results:
According to our hypothesis, sources of meaning and meaning in life seem to remain robust in relatives caring for terminally ill family members during the three-month survey period. A parabolic development pattern of single sources of meaning indicates an adjustment process. An important limitation of our study is the small number of participants compared with larger multivariate models because of high dropout rates, primarily due to the death of three-quarters of the participants during the survey period.
Social support programs for dementia caregivers were widely used in order to reduce care burden. We investigated which types of social supports can reduce psychological and non-psychological burdens of dementia caregivers, and explored the mechanism of those social supports.
Methods:
We evaluated 731 community-dwelling dementia patients and their caregivers from the National Survey of Dementia Care in South Korea. We investigated the five types of social supports (emotional support, informational support, tangible support, positive social interaction, affectionate support) using the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey in each caregiver. The mechanisms of specific types of social support on psychological/non-psychological burden were examined using path analysis.
Results:
Positive social interaction and affectionate support reduced psychological burden via direct and indirect paths. Tangible support reduced the non-psychological burden via direct and indirect paths. Informational support and emotional support were not helpful for reducing psychological or non-psychological burden. A maximum of 20% of psychological burden could be relieved by positive social interaction and 10.3% of that could be reduced by affectionate support. Tangible support was associated with a 15.1% maximal improvement in non-psychological burden.
Conclusions:
In order to reduce caregiver burden in dementia effectively, psychosocial interventions should be tailored to target type of caregiver burden.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.