CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 114Cancer survivorship and careWomen's cancer prevention and managementChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 170 of the 172 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Home-based multidimensional survivorship programmes for breast cancer survivors

Open access
Cheng, Karis Kin Fong, Lim, Yee Ting Ethel, Koh, Zhi Min, Tam, Wilson Wai San·2017·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011152.pub2PMC PMC6483678
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The prognosis and survival rate of women with breast cancer have significantly improved worldwide. Effective home-based multidimensional programmes for breast cancer survivors have gained an ever greater emphasis in survivorship care to maximise women's quality of life for their successful transition to rehabilitation and normal life. It is important to summarise the best available evidence to evaluate the effects of home-based multidimensional survivorship programmes on quality of life in women within 10 years of the completion of surgery or adjuvant cancer therapy for breast cancer, or both. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of home-based, multidimensional survivorship (HBMS) programmes on maintaining or improving the quality of life in breast cancer survivors. SEARCH METHODS: In April 2016 we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Specialised Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also screened reference lists of all identified studies and contacted study authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs assessing the effects of HBMS programmes in maintaining or improving quality of life in women with stages 0 to 3 breast cancer who completed primary cancer treatment (surgery or adjuvant cancer therapy, or both) up to 10 years earlier. We considered studies where the interventions included more than one of the following listed components: educational (such as information provision and self-management advice), physical (such as exercise training and resistance training) and psychological (such as counselling and cognitive therapies), to constitute a multidimensional programme. Interventions had to be allowed to be carried out at home. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed eligible studies for inclusion, and performed quality assessment and extracted relevant data of the included studies. Quality of life was the primary outcome of the review. MAIN RESULTS: We included 22 RCTs and four quasi-RCTs on 2272 participants. We categorised the intervention components into four groups: educational and psychological; educational and physical; physical and psychological; and educational, physical and psychological. Most of the studies used usual care (routine medical follow-up services) as the comparator. A few studies used a lower level or different type of intervention (e.g. stress management or exercise) or attention control as the comparator.We used the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT B), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life C30 (EORTC C30), Quality of Life (QoL) Breast Cancer, and SF36 questionnaires to assess quality of life. HBMS programmes may increase breast cancer-specific quality of life and global quality of life immediately after the intervention, as measured by FACT-B and EORTC C30 (FACT-B: mean difference (MD) 4.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.33 to 6.78, 7 studies, 764 participants; EORTC: MD 4.38, 95% CI 0.11 to 8.64, 6 studies; 299 participants; moderate-quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in quality of life as measured by QoL-Breast Cancer or SF-36 (QoL-Breast Cancer: MD 0.42, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.85, 2 studies, 111 participants, very low-quality evidence; physical composite score SF36: MD 0.55, 95% CI -3.52 to 4.63, 2 studies, 308 participants, low-quality evidence).We observed a similar pattern at one to three months after the intervention: FACT-B (MD 6.10, 95% CI 2.48 to 9.72, 2 studies, 426 participants), EORTC-C30 (MD 6.32, 95% CI 0.61 to 12.04, 2 studies; 172 participants) and QoL-Breast Cancer (MD 0.45, 95% CI -0.19 to 1.09, 1 study, 61 participants). At four to six months and 12 months, there was no evidence of a difference in quality of life between groups (four to six months: EORTC - MD 0.08, 95% CI -7.28 to 7.44, 2 studies; 117 participants; SF-36 - MD -1.05, 95% CI -5.60 to 3.51, 2 studies, 308 participants; 12 months: EORTC - MD 2.04, 95% CI -9.91 to 13.99, 1 study; 57 participants).Functional status was incorporated into the quality of life subscale findings. HBMS programmes may decrease anxiety (MD of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) -1.01, 95% CI -1.94 to -0.08, 5 studies, 253 participants, low-quality evidence) compared to control immediately after the intervention but the effect did not persist at four to six months. There was no evidence of improvements in depression immediately after HBMS (MD of HADS -1.36, 95% CI -2.94 to 0.22, 4 studies, 213 participants, low-quality evidence) or at follow-up. HBMS programmes may also decrease fatigue (MD -1.11, 95% CI -1.78 to -0.45, 3 studies, 127 participants; low-quality evidence) and insomnia (MD -1.81, 95% CI -3.34 to -0.27, 3 studies, 185 participants, low-quality evidence).None of the included studies reported service needs a

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd011152.pub2

Cites

170 of 170 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Fiorentino, 2008, Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia in breast cancer survivors: a randomized controlled crossover study [Dissertation]
  2. Dorai, 2004, Impact of a modified dietary plan on the health related quality of life of minority participants in the Women's Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) Study [PhD thesis]
  3. Graves, 2002, Quality of life intervention for breast cancer survivors: application of social cognitive theory [Dissertation]
  4. Hockett, 2005, The effects of a comprehensive post-treatment recovery program for breast cancer survivors [Dissertation]
  5. Piland, 2011, Effectiveness of a cancer center based physical activity intervention in breast cancer survivors [Master's Thesis],
  6. Jeffs, 2013, Randomised controlled trial to determine the benefit of daily home-based exercise in addition to self-care in the management of breast cancer-related lymphoedema: a feasibility study, Supportive Care in Cancer, 21, 1013, 10.1007/s00520-012-1621-6 · DOI
  7. Lefebvre C Manheimer E Glanville J Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011 Available from handbook.cochrane.org
  8. Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5) 2014
  9. Rogers, 2009, Physical activity and health outcomes three months after completing a physical activity behavior change intervention: persistent and delayed effects, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 18, 1410, 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-1045 · DOI
  10. Schag, 1989, Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System (CARES) Manual
  11. Schunemann HJ Oxman AD Vist GE Higgins JPT Deeks JJ Glaziou P Chapter 12: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011 Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org
  12. Ware, 2005, How to score version 2 of the SF-12 health survey

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 114

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cheng, K. K. F., Lim, Y. T. E., Koh, Z. M., & Tam, W. W. S.
Affiliations
National University of Singapore (SG)
ORCID
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-08-24
Volume
2017
Issue
8
Pages
CD011152-CD011152
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
DOI
10.1002/14651858.cd011152.pub2
PMC
PMC6483678
OpenAlex
W1919908001
Cited by
114
References
172
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2
FWCI
1.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Keywords
breast cancer survivors, home-based intervention, quality of life, survivorship care, exercise training, resistance training, self-management education, psychological intervention, cancer rehabilitation, FACT-B, EORTC QLQ-C30, SF-36, SF-6D, SF-12, SF-1000
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Breast Neoplasms, Depression, Fatigue, Female, Home Care Services, Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Patient Education as Topic, Prognosis, Quality of Life, Program Evaluation, Exercise, Survival Rate, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Survivors, Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review