4.3 Article

Navigating severe chronic cancer-related fatigue: an interpretative phenomenological analysis

Journal

PSYCHOLOGY & HEALTH
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages 494-517

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08870446.2021.1973468

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article presents a phenomenological study on the embodied experiences of patients with Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue (CCRF), aiming to better understand this complex phenomenon. Through individual interviews with 25 participants, it explores the themes of worn out, diminishment of one's 'I can', invisibility, and regaining one's 'I can' in the post-cancer experience. The results suggest the importance of considering the role of the body and limitations of one's 'I can' in clinical practice and provide insights for personalized and optimized treatment of CCRF.
Objective This article presents a phenomenological study on the embodied experiences of patients with Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue (CCRF), aiming to better understand this complex phenomenon. Design Data collection consisted of individual interviews with 25 participants who suffered from severe CCRF for at least three months after cancer treatment was finished. Main outcome measures Against the theoretical background of philosophical phenomenology, we explored embodied experiences, incorporated temporal and spatial aspects of living with CCRF. We applied interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) to analyze the transcripts of the interviews. Results Using IPA, we identified four themes on how chronic fatigue is experienced post-cancer: (1) Worn out; (2) Diminishment of one's 'I can'; (3) Invisibility; and (4) Regaining one's 'I can'. Conclusion For clinical practice, these results imply that professionals could focus more on the role of the body and limitations of one's 'I can' when treating CCRF. By studying these embodied CCRF experiences in individual patients, future research could help personalize and optimize treatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available