4.7 Article

Cognitive changes in multiethnic Asian breast cancer patients: a focus group study

期刊

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
卷 23, 期 10, 页码 2547-2552

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mds029

关键词

chemobrain; chemotherapy; cognitive function; focus group; psychooncology; qualitative

类别

资金

  1. Merck Co., Inc.
  2. Department of Pharmacy, NCCS
  3. Nanyang Girls' Boarding School

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to gather descriptions from multiethnic Asian breast cancer patients on their experiences and impact of chemotherapy-associated cognitive changes on their daily lives and their coping strategies. Forty-three chemotherapy-receiving breast cancer patients participated in eight English or Chinese structured focus group discussions, conducted by trained psychosocial oncologists and medical social workers. Participants were unfamiliar and averse to both English and Chinese-translated equivalent of the term 'chemobrain'. Participants viewed this phenomenon holistically as a by-product of the physical (fatigue and aging) and psychosocial (anxiety and mood changes) adverse effects associated with chemotherapy. Most participants encountered memory loss, difficulty in decision making and speech problems after receiving chemotherapy. Married participants expressed frustration as cognitive deterioration limited their conservative roles as homemakers. Despite knowing the potential neurocognitive effects, participants valued the benefits of chemotherapy. Identified coping strategies included playing mahjong for mind stimulation and management of psychosocial factors, such as practicing qi gong, to regulate their moods and to take complementary alternative medicines to reduce the severity of their fatigue. The phenomenon 'chemobrain' is unfamiliar to most Asian cancer patients yet it has significantly impacted their daily lives. Our results suggested that a culturally relevant approach should be adopted to evaluate and manage cognitive changes in these patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据