IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v28y2019i9-10p1695-1707.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do family health conversations impact patients with glioblastoma multiforme and their family members?

Author

Listed:
  • Inge Faarup
  • Jørgen T. Lauridsen
  • Karin Lütgen
  • Anni Nørregaard
  • Frantz Rom Poulsen
  • Birte Østergaard

Abstract

Aims and objectives To assess the impact of family health conversations (FamHC) as a supplement to conventional care on health‐related quality of life (HRQoL), family functioning (FFSS) and family hardiness or resilience (FHI) 4 and 14 weeks postoperatively among patients with glioblastoma multiforme and their family members. Background There is a lack of knowledge about the efficiency of FamHC among families experiencing glioblastoma multiforme. Design A quasi‐experimental pre‐ and post‐test design adhering to the STROBE (Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology) guidelines for case–control studies. Patients and family members were included consecutively in the pretest period from November 2013–December 2014 for the control group (offered traditional care only), and in the post‐test period from January 2015–December 2015 for the intervention group (offered traditional care and FamHC). For both groups, 4 and 14 weeks postoperative measurement were obtained. Methods Differences in outcomes were assessed using a difference‐in‐difference regression analysis approach measuring difference across pre and post groups and across 4 and 14 weeks measurements. Results The study does not reveal significant effects of FamHC (all p‐values larger than 0.05) as measured by the three instruments WHOQOL‐BREF, FFSS and FHI. Conclusions The present study was not able to show significant effects of FamHC. However, it cannot be left out that the intervention might be helpful and supportive at a later state of the illness trajectory. Relevance for clinical practice The study adds to the growing evidence‐based knowledge on FamHC by questioning their potential use in different cultural contexts among families experiencing critical illness. Oncological nurses need to adapt this information to support their daily care for the patients and their close relatives. For future studies, it is recommended that the families themselves choose when the conversations should take place during the course of the illness.

Suggested Citation

  • Inge Faarup & Jørgen T. Lauridsen & Karin Lütgen & Anni Nørregaard & Frantz Rom Poulsen & Birte Østergaard, 2019. "Do family health conversations impact patients with glioblastoma multiforme and their family members?," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(9-10), pages 1695-1707, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:9-10:p:1695-1707
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14777
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14777?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto Abadie, 2005. "Semiparametric Difference-in-Differences Estimators," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(1), pages 1-19.
    2. Carina Persson & Eva Benzein, 2014. "Family Health Conversations: How Do They Support Health?," Nursing Research and Practice, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-11, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Birte Østergaard & Romy Mahrer‐Imhof & Mahdi Shamali & Birgitte Nørgaard & Bernard Jeune & Karen Steenvinkel Pedersen & Jørgen Lauridsen, 2021. "Effect of family nursing therapeutic conversations on patients with heart failure and their family members: Secondary outcomes of a randomised multicentre trial," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5-6), pages 742-756, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Christian Hansen & Kengo Kato, 2018. "High-dimensional econometrics and regularized GMM," CeMMAP working papers CWP35/18, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. Matias Busso & Patrick Kline, 2008. "Do Local Economic Development Programs Work? Evidence from the Federal Empowerment Zone Program," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1639, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Zhao, Jun, 2020. "Doubly robust difference-in-differences estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 219(1), pages 101-122.
    4. Trojanek, Radoslaw & Huderek-Glapska, Sonia, 2018. "Measuring the noise cost of aviation – The association between the Limited Use Area around Warsaw Chopin Airport and property values," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 103-114.
    5. Picarelli, Nathalie, 2016. "Who really benefits from export processing zones? Evidence from Nicaraguan municipalities," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 318-332.
    6. Christophe Loussouarn & Carine Franc & Yann Videau & Julien Mousquès, 2021. "Can General Practitioners Be More Productive? The Impact of Teamwork and Cooperation with Nurses on GP Activities," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(3), pages 680-698, March.
    7. Malerba, Daniele, 2020. "Poverty alleviation and local environmental degradation: An empirical analysis in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    8. Mansur, Erin T, 2007. "Upstream Competition and Vertical Integration in Electricity Markets," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(1), pages 125-156, February.
    9. Melanie Arntz & Simon Lo & Ralf Wilke, 2014. "Bounds analysis of competing risks: a non-parametric evaluation of the effect of unemployment benefits on migration," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 199-228, February.
    10. Francesco Vona & Giovanni Marin & Davide Consoli, 2019. "Measures, drivers and effects of green employment: evidence from US local labor markets, 2006–2014," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(5), pages 1021-1048.
    11. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "The Least developed countries' TRIPS Waiver and the Strength of Intellectual Property Protection," EconStor Preprints 271537, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    12. Asako Ohinata & Matteo Picchio, 2020. "Financial support for long-term elderly care and household saving behaviour," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(1), pages 247-268.
    13. Pablo Lavado & Gonzalo Rivera, 2016. "Identifying Treatment Effects with Data Combination and Unobserved Heterogeneity," Working Papers 79, Peruvian Economic Association.
    14. Haiyang Lu & Peng Nie & Alfonso Sousa-Poza, 2021. "The Effect of Parental Educational Expectations on Adolescent Subjective Well-Being and the Moderating Role of Perceived Academic Pressure: Longitudinal Evidence for China," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 14(1), pages 117-137, February.
    15. Chen, Jing & Li, Rui, 2023. "Pay for elite private schools or pay for higher housing prices? Evidence from an exogenous policy shock," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. Patrick Bennett, 2021. "The Work-To-School Transition: Job Displacement and Skill Upgrading among Young High School Dropouts," CESifo Working Paper Series 9417, CESifo.
    17. James Roumasset & Christopher Wada, 2012. "The Economics of Groundwater," Working Papers 201211, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    18. Chabé-Ferret, Sylvain, 2017. "Should We Combine Difference In Differences with Conditioning on Pre-Treatment Outcomes?," TSE Working Papers 17-824, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    19. Callaway, Brantly & Li, Tong & Oka, Tatsushi, 2018. "Quantile treatment effects in difference in differences models under dependence restrictions and with only two time periods," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 206(2), pages 395-413.
    20. Fabio Méndez & Facundo Sepúlveda & Nieves Valdés, 2016. "Legalization and human capital accumulation," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(3), pages 721-756, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:9-10:p:1695-1707. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.