Cited by 28Cancer survivorship and careNursing care and researchFamily Support in Illness

The role of informal caregivers during cancer patients’ recovery from chemotherapy

Ockerby, Cherene, Livingston, Patricia, O’Connell, Bev, Gaskin, Cadeyrn J.·2013·Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences

Abstract

AIMS: (i) To investigate the availability, perceived importance and roles of informal caregivers in the recovery of patients treated at day oncology centres and (ii) identify differences between patients with and without informal caregivers in the extent to which they experienced symptoms, and the level of bother symptoms caused. METHOD: Patients from three Australian hospitals (n = 122) were recruited during cycles 1 or 2 of adjuvant chemotherapy. Participants completed a modified version of the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) each day for 5 days after chemotherapy. A telephone interview conducted 10 days post-treatment explored the availability, importance and roles of caregivers. During the interview, participants also completed the modified RSCL in which they were asked about the extent to which they experienced, and were bothered by, each symptom over the prior 5 days combined. RESULTS: Overall, 71% of participants had an informal caregiver in the 5 days postchemotherapy, commonly a partner. More women (71%) than men (48%) had a caregiver (p < 0.05). Caregivers were perceived to be highly important; they were more important for women than men (U = 213.50, p < 0.01). The most common assistance caregivers provided was meal preparation and emotional support and companionship. On days 6-10 postchemotherapy, the extent to which overall physical symptoms were experienced was higher for patients with a caregiver than without (U = 987.50, p < 0.05); similarly their symptoms caused more bother (U = 966.00, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlighted the importance of informal caregivers to patients postchemotherapy. It is imperative that patients are informed of the importance of this support so a caregiver can be arranged, if possible. Understanding the needs of patients following chemotherapy would enable health professionals to advise patients, with or without caregivers, how to best prepare for and manage their recovery at home.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2012.01015.x

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ockerby, C., Livingston, P., O’Connell, B., & Gaskin, C. J.
Affiliations
Deakin University (AU)
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-05-23
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
147-155
ISSN
  • 0283-9318 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-6712
OpenAlex
W1491840631
Cited by
28
References
27
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
Keywords
informal caregivers, cancer patients, adjuvant chemotherapy, symptom burden, somatic symptoms, caregiver availability, emotional support, meal preparation, home recovery, gender differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Antineoplastic Agents, Australia, Humans, Neoplasms, Role, Caregivers

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