Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Volume 57, Issue 2 , Pages 123-131, August 2004

Meta-analysis of the effects of psychosocial interventions on survival time in cancer patients

  • Geir Smedslund

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +47-24-16-30-00; fax: +47-24-16-30-03
    • Department for Social Services Research, Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, P.O. Box 8054 Dep., NO-0031, Oslo, Norway
  • ,
  • Gerd Inger Ringdal

      Affiliations

    • Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

Received 27 November 2002; accepted 3 September 2003.

Abstract 

Objective

To provide a quantitative summary of effects of psychosocial interventions on cancer survival, and to present an overview of methodological and reporting aspects of the studies.

Method

Electronic searches and manual searches of reference lists from review articles and retrieved papers. Two coders independently coded study, participant, treatment, and outcome characteristics of the studies meeting selection criteria.

Results

Thirteen journal articles published between 1989 and 2003 reporting results from 14 controlled intervention studies were included. Results are based on data obtained from 2626 subjects. Effect sizes [hazard ratios (HR)] were heterogeneous and random effects models were used in the analyses. The total mean inverse-variance-weighted HR was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.65–1.11). Randomized studies (n=8) showed no overall treatment effect (HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.56–1.06), neither did the nonrandomized studies (HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.61–1.62). Interventions using individual treatment (n=3) were, however, found to be effective (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.43–0.70) but interventions using group treatment (n=9) were ineffective (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.73–1.27). Group treatments of breast cancer (n=6) were ineffective (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.69–1.31).

Conclusion

A definite conclusion about whether psychosocial interventions prolong cancer survival seems premature. Future studies should use randomization to avoid self-selection of patients with poor prognosis. Interventions should focus on a single diagnosis, take into account known risk factors, and describe their interventions thoroughly.

Keywords:  Cancer, Meta-analysis, Psychosocial, Psychotherapy, Survival

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0022-3999(03)00575-0

doi:10.1016/S0022-3999(03)00575-0

Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Volume 57, Issue 2 , Pages 123-131, August 2004