'Measuring up': A comparison of two response expectancy assessment formats completed by men treated with radiotherapy for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

Response expectancies of cancer treatment toxicities are often, but not always, associated with subsequent experiences. A recent meta-analysis indicated that response expectancies, measured using different assessment formats, reveal different effect sizes, potentially explaining mixed outcomes. Utilizing a clinical sample, we compared 5-point assessments and visual analogue scales, as measures of response expectancies for the incidence and severity of subsequent toxicities.

METHODS

Four weeks pre-radiotherapy, 45 men with prostate cancer rated their response expectancies of the same 18 toxicities on 5-point assessments and visual analogue scales, presented in random order. Descriptors anchored each end of visual analogue scales and every point of 5-point assessments was labelled, including an 'unsure' midpoint. Toxicities were subsequently assessed 2-weeks into radiotherapy on 100-point visual analogue scales.

RESULTS

Across all toxicities, 17.5-62.8% of patients selected 'unsure' on 5-point assessments. No response expectancies were reported on 5-point assessments for 'blood in stools' or 'rectal urgency' yet 54.8%-64.3% of patients indicated response expectancies for these toxicities on visual analogue scales. Visual analogue scales and 5-point scales demonstrated small-to-moderate associations (r = 0.30-0.58) as measures of response expectancy incidence, but mostly large associations when visual analogue scales captured severity (r = 0.43-0.76). Response expectancies measured with visual analogue scales predicted more toxicities to a moderate degree or greater (68.8%) than 5-point assessments (37.5%).

CONCLUSION

This novel investigation demonstrated an 'unsure' midpoint is often selected, potentially reducing the sensitivity of 5-point assessments. Based on their associations, and outcomes, these assessment formats should be considered independent in response expectancy research of cancer treatment toxicities.

Optimizing expectations about endocrine treatment for breast cancer: Results of the randomized controlled psy-breast trial

Background

Medication side effects are strongly determined by non-pharmacological, nocebo mechanisms, particularly patients’ expectations. Optimizing expectations could minimize side effect burden. This study evaluated whether brief psychological expectation management training (EXPECT) optimizes medication-related expectations in women starting adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) for breast cancer.

Method

In a multisite randomized controlled design, 197 women were randomized to EXPECT, supportive therapy (SUPPORT), or treatment as usual (TAU). The three-session cognitive-behavioral EXPECT employs psychoeducation, guided imagery, and side effect management training. Outcomes were necessity-concern beliefs about AET, expected side effects, expected coping ability, treatment control expectations, and adherence intention.

Results

Both interventions were well accepted and feasible. Patients’ necessity-concern beliefs were optimized in EXPECT compared to both TAU and SUPPORT, d = .41, p < .001; d = .40, p < .001. Expected coping ability and treatment control expectations were optimized compared to TAU, d = .35, p = .02; d = .42, p < 001, but not to SUPPORT. Adherence intention was optimized compared to SUPPORT, d = .29, p = .02, but not to TAU. Expected side effects did not change significantly.

Conclusion

Expectation management effectively and partly specifically (compared to SUPPORT) modified medication-related expectations in women starting AET. Given the influence of expectations on long-term treatment outcome, psychological interventions like EXPECT might provide potential pathways to reduce side effect burden and improve quality of life during medication intake.

Individual Factors Contributing to Nausea in First-Time Chemotherapy Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study

Objective

The expectation of developing side effects can enhance the likelihood to develop them – a phenomenon referred to as nocebo effect. Whether nocebo effects can be reduced by lowering negative expectancies, is not clear. The aim of this prospective study was to learn more about the factors contributing to nausea expectancy and their potential role in actual occurrence of nausea in patients undergoing chemotherapy for the first time in their life.

Methods

Patients scheduled for moderately emetogenic chemotherapeutic regimens filled in questionnaires to assess state anxiety and quality of life and to rate the expectancy of nausea as a side effect of chemotherapy. Patient diaries were used to monitor the severity of post-chemotherapy nausea in the 4 days following chemotherapy administration. Bivariate analyses complemented by multiple regression analyses were performed to identify the relationship between nausea expectation and nausea occurrence.

Results

121 female patients (mean age 53 years) with completed questionnaires were included in the analyses. The majority of the patients had a diagnosis of breast cancer (86%). The two main sources for nausea expectancy were positive history of nausea in other situations and state anxiety. Patients with high expectancy levels (first quartile) experienced greater nausea than those with lower expectancy levels. Bivariate analyses revealed a weak but non-significant association between nausea expectation and post-chemotherapy nausea. When controlling for age, type of cancer, history of nausea, state and trait anxiety, and global quality of life, positive history of nausea (OR = 2.592; 95% CI, 1.0 to 6.67; p < 0.05), younger age (OR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.99; p < 0.05), and a lower quality of life (OR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.0; p < 0.05), but not nausea expectancy (OR = 1.014; 95% CI, 0.51 to 2.02; p = 0.969), predicted the occurrence of post-chemotherapy nausea.

Conclusion

In this female cohort, younger patients with lower initial quality of life and a positive history of nausea were at higher risk to develop nausea after first time chemotherapy. These patients may benefit from psychological co-interventions that aim to enhance quality of life.

Why current drug adherence programs fail: addressing psychological risk factors of nonadherence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of a selection of largely neglected psychological risk factors for nonadherence, and to offer new approaches to improve medication adherence.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current adherence research and intervention programs focus on a few risk factors for nonadherence, such as complexity of the drug regimen. In addition, other important risk factors of nonadherence are neglected or insufficiently addressed. There is good evidence for the significant role of the quality of the patient-healthcare provider relationship. Other risk factors like the individual history of nonadherence, the lack of acceptance of having a treatable disorder, fear of side-effects, comorbid depression, and cognitive impairment have been broadly neglected in adherence programs, although they offer a powerful key to improve adherence-oriented interventions.

SUMMARY

Current research on determinants of nonadherence has focused on a few risk factors, while neglecting crucial psychological predictors of nonadherence. The personalized consideration of a multiplicity of risk factors offers a new basis for the development and evaluation of interventions to better promote adherence.

Patients' Expectations Regarding Medical Treatment: A Critical Review of Concepts and Their Assessment

Patients’ expectations in the context of medical treatment represent a growing area of research, with accumulating evidence suggesting their influence on health outcomes across a variety of medical conditions. However, the aggregation of evidence is complicated due to an inconsistent and disintegrated application of expectation constructs and the heterogeneity of assessment strategies. Therefore, based on current expectation concepts, this critical review provides an integrated model of patients’ expectations in medical treatment. Moreover, we review existing assessment tools in the context of the integrative model of expectations and provide recommendations for improving future assessment. The integrative model includes expectations regarding treatment and patients’ treatment-related behavior. Treatment and behavior outcome expectations can relate to aspects regarding benefits and side effects and can refer to internal (e.g., symptoms) and external outcomes (e.g., reactions of others). Furthermore, timeline, structural and process expectations are important aspects with respect to medical treatment. Additionally, generalized expectations such as generalized self-efficacy or optimism have to be considered. Several instruments assessing different aspects of expectations in medical treatment can be found in the literature. However, many were developed without conceptual standardization and psychometric evaluation. Moreover, they merely assess single aspects of expectations, thus impeding the integration of evidence regarding the differential aspects of expectations. As many instruments assess treatment-specific expectations, they are not comparable between different conditions. To generate a more comprehensive understanding of expectation effects in medical treatments, we recommend that future research should apply standardized, psychometrically evaluated measures, assessing multidimensional aspects of patients’ expectations that are applicable across various medical treatments. In the future, more research is needed on the interrelation of different expectation concepts as well as on factors influencing patients’ expectations of illness and treatment. Considering the importance of patients’ expectations for health outcomes across many medical conditions, an integrated understanding and assessment of such expectations might facilitate interventions aiming to optimize patients’ expectations in order to improve health outcomes.