Figure 1. Flowchart of literature search
# relevant records identified through database searching
= 1279
# additional records identified through other sources
=
# records after duplicates removed
= 709
# records screened
(titles and abstracts)
= 709
# records excluded
= 693
Focused on Biomed Factors = 71
Focused on Chemo/Drug Therapy = 180
Focused on non-Psychosocial Therapy (e.g. art/music therapy)
= 39
Focused on Screening Information = 41
Focused on Cancer Predictors = 47
Focused on Community Engagement = 14
Broad Cancer Information/Discussion = 34
Focused on Caregiver interventions = 39
Focused on Family Interventions = 36
Focused on Patient-only Interventions = 159
Focused on couples, but not interventions = 21
Primarily focused-on on couple-based intervention, not published in
English or French = 3 (2 German, 1 Chinese)
# full-text articles assessed
for eligibility
= 27
# studies identified after contacting authors
=2
# studies included in review
= 19
# full-text articles excluded,
with reasons
= 10
Focused on couples, describes proposed
interventions only
=7
Focused on couples, but not outcomes of
interest
=3
Table 1. Summary of couple-based interventions
Description of intervention
Initial Intervention Program
Follow-up
Badger et al.
(2007)
Three-arm intervention trial comparing a Telephone Interpersonal Counselling intervention (TIP-C) with a
self-managed exercise intervention (also delivered by telephone) and an Attention Control (AC) group who
received printed information on breast cancer. TIP-C involved weekly phone calls that focused on cancer
education, social support, awareness and management of depressive and anxiety symptoms, and on changes
in participants’ roles in life. Partners in the TIP-C condition received a separate call every second week.
Exercise intervention focused on low-impact exercise four times a week. Patients in AC group received brief
weekly telephone calls; partners every second week.
Six weekly TIP-C sessions (M = 34
minutes)
6 weeks; 10
weeks
Badger et al.
(2010)
Two-arm intervention trial comparing two different telephone-delivered interventions. The Telephone
Interpersonal Counselling intervention (TIP-C) intervention involved weekly phone calls that focused on
mood and affect, emotional expression, interpersonal communication and relationships, social support, and
cancer information. Partners received a separate call every second. Health Education Attention Condition
(HEAC) involved weekly phone calls for patients, and bi-weekly phone calls partners. Participants received
written materials from the National Cancer Institute regarding prostate cancer diagnosis and treatments,
nutrition, exercise, and quitting smoking. No counselling was offered in this condition.
8 weekly phone calls (patients); 4
bi-weekly phone calls (partners)
8 weeks; 16
weeks
Baucom et
al. (2009)
Relationship Enhancement (RE): places emphasis on viewing the couple as a unique and dynamic unit.
Content is tailored to the specific needs of the individuals in each couple. Couples are taught problem-solving
skills regarding medical treatments and their relative practical implications for everyday life, emotional
expressiveness skills to facilitate active listening and discussion of particular breast cancer issues, and are
encouraged to seek positive meaning and existential growth from their cancer experience
Six 75-minute biweekly sessions
12-months
Budin et al.
(2008)
Four-arm intervention comparing: disease management (DM); disease management and standardised
psychoeducation (SE); disease management and telephone counselling (TC); disease management and
standardised psychoeducation and telephone counselling (SE + TC). The DM intervention served as the
control condition and involved the delivery of standard treatment protocol. The SE intervention involved the
presentation of four psychoeducation videos that addressed coping with diagnosis, recovering from surgery,
adjuvant therapy, and ongoing recovery. The TC intervention was designed to increase the patient’s and the
partner’s sense of control over the cancer experience. Four phase-specific TC sessions were tailored and
delivered separately to patients and partners. The SE+TC intervention combined DM with the SE videos and
the TC framework.
Telephone counselling (TC),
standardised education (SE),
TC+SE, and disease management
(DM) was phase specific:
delivered when participants entered
new phase (T0/T1baseline/diagnosis, T2 –
postsurgery, T3 – adjuvant therapy,
T4 – ongoing recovery
Varied
depending
on
treatment
course
Description of intervention
Initial Intervention Program
Follow-up
Campbell et
al. (2006)
Telephone coping skills targeting African-American prostate cancer survivors and their partners. A coping
skills training intervention (CST) delivered by telephone was compared to a usual care (control condition).
CST specifically aimed to provide information about prostate cancer and its’ long-term effects, teach
problem-solving skills, and provide training in cognitive and behavioural coping skills.
Six weekly 60-minute Coping
Skills Training (CST) sessions
Postintervention
Donnelly et
al. (2000)
A pre-post pilot study of an intervention using interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) by telephone for patients
with advanced breast cancer. IPT focuses on exploring the psychosocial and physical impact of cancer and
treatment, preparing the patient and partner for future events related to treatment, encouraging
communication, improving emotional expression, fostering independence, facilitating coping, and optimizing
social support.
Weekly sessions (M=16 patients,
M=11 partners) during
chemotherapy,
Postintervention
Kayser,
Feldman,
Borstelmann,
& Daniels
(2010)
Partners in Coping Program (PICP) was provided by a trained therapist in fortnightly sessions. Sessions
followed various themes including improving coping ability, supportive communication and sexual
functioning, assessing couples’ social support, and caring for children. Standard Social Work Services
(SSWS) couples were provided with the contact details of a social worker who could link them to various
services including individual and family counselling, community support services.
Nine 60-minute biweekly over an
average of 5 months
n/a
Kuijer et al.
(2004)
Focus on the enhancement of relationship equity in order to improve relationship quality and decrease
psychological distress . An experimental group was compared with a wait-list control group. The intervention
was led by a psychologist and couples were encouraged to discuss openly their relationship before and after
the cancer diagnosis and their own views of problems in their relationship and potential solutions. They were
given homework tasks to complete where they detailed their ideal support wishes, the goal being to enhance
supportive communication and to highlight any existing inequities in their own relationship.
Five 90-minute biweekly sessions
3-months
Kurtz et al.
(2005)
A 20-week symptom-management intervention that included five face-to-face sessions and five telephone
sessions with a trained nurse was compared to a usual-care control group. The intervention focused on
reviewing the physical and psychological symptoms experienced by the patient, the involvement of their
partner in managing these, and outlining specific guidelines for both patient and partner to follow to best
manage these symptoms. These guidelines were revisited and reassessed at each follow-up.
10 contact (5 face-to-face, 5
telephone) over 20 weeks
10 weeks;
20 weeks
Description of intervention
Initial Intervention Program
Follow-up
Manne et al.
(2005)
Investigated the efficacy of a couple-based group intervention for women with breast cancer. The
intervention focused on enhancing supportive exchanges between patients and their partners, and developing
coping skills. Session themes included couple-level stress management, couple-focused coping, issues with
sexuality, communication skills, and planning for post-treatment life.
Six 90-minute weekly
6-months
McCorkle et
al. (2007)
A prospective randomised controlled trial comparing standardised nursing intervention protocol (SNIP) with
a usual care (control) condition for patients and spouses following a radical prostatectomy. SNIP focuses
monitoring and managing symptoms, teaching self-care, encouraging use of community resources and
supportive relationships, and counselling patients and family members. Patients’ and partners’ needs
(psychosocial and physical) are addressed individually, and specific strategies for providing support are
discussed. Couple-based strategies are also discussed and a shared management plan is devised.
16 contacts (8 in-home, 8
telephone) over 8 weeks, SNIP
3-months; 6
months
McLean et
al. (2008)
A pilot study with a cohort of couples where patients had been diagnosed with a variety of advanced cancer
types. The intervention presented to couples was an adaptation of Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy
(EFT) that had been specifically formulated for patients with advanced cancer and their partners. EFT
emphasises the sharing of emotions, and in the context of an advanced cancer diagnosis, normalizing feelings
of separation by clarifying patients’ and partners’ insecurities and restructuring their communication styles.
8-20 sessions of EFT
After four
sessions;
After eight
sessions; 3
months
postintervention
McLean et
al. (2011)
The intervention presented to couples was an adaptation of Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy (EFT) that
had been specifically formulated for patients with advanced cancer and their partners. EFT emphasises the
sharing of emotions, and in the context of an advanced cancer diagnosis, normalizing feelings of separation
by clarifying patients’ and partners’ insecurities and restructuring their communication styles.
Eight, one-hour weekly sessions
8 weeks; 12
weeks
Nezu et al.
(2003)
Problem-solving therapy for patients and a ‘supportive other’ (defined as PST-SO) with problem-solving
therapy for patients only (PST) with and with a wait-list control group. PST focuses on teaching couples to
identify the precise nature of problems faced, producing a range of solutions, evaluating and understanding
consequences of particular actions and proceeding with the most favourable, and then monitoring the
outcomes of the chosen solution.
PST/PST-SO: Ten 90-minute
weekly sessions
6 and 12months
Northouse et
al. (2005)
Description of intervention
Initial Intervention Program
Follow-up
The FOCUS program consists of five central components: family involvement, optimistic attitude, coping
effectiveness, uncertainty reduction and symptom management.
Initial phase: Three 90-minute
home visits spaced one-month
apart
3 and 6months
Booster phase: Two phone calls to
both patient and caregiver (~30
minutes/call) provided after 3month follow-up
Northouse et
al. (2007)
The FOCUS program consists of five central components: family involvement, optimistic attitude, coping
effectiveness, uncertainty reduction and symptom management.
Three 90-minute home visits and
two phone calls to both patient and
caregiver (~30 minutes/call)
spaced 2-weeks apart, between
baseline and 4-month follow-up
4 and 8months
Northouse et
al. (2011)
The FOCUS program consists of five central components: family involvement, optimistic attitude, coping
effectiveness, uncertainty reduction and symptom management.
Breif FOCUS: 2 x 90-minute home
visits, one 30 minute phone call
3 months; 6
months
Extensive Focus: 4 x 90-minute
home visits, two 30 minute phone
calls
Porter et al.
(2009)
A partner-assisted emotional disclosure (PAED) intervention was compared with a partner-assisted
educational (EDU) intervention for patients with gastrointestinal cancer and their partners. The intervention
focused on decreasing the ‘holding back’ of cancer-related disclosures to partners, increasing relationship
quality and intimacy, decreasing psychological distress. The PAED intervention involved training couples in
effective disclosure of their cancer-related concerns. Patients were asked to describe a particular cancer
experience to their partner in detail. The partner’s role was to support the patient’s disclosure, and they were
instructed to empathise with and understand the particular experience, avoid problem-solving, and use
reflective listening. Couples in the EDU intervention also attended four sessions with a therapist, but received
general cancer information only.
4 face-to-face sessions
Scott,
Halford, &
Ward (2004)
Description of intervention
Initial Intervention Program
Follow-up
Three-arm intervention, consisting of a Medical Information (MI) intervention, a Patient Coping training
(PC) intervention, and the CanCOPE intervention. The MI intervention involved the provision of educational
materials regarding patients’ particular cancer and associated treatments, as well as five brief telephone calls.
No specific psychological intervention was administered in the MI intervention. The PC intervention
combined the educational materials from the MI intervention with supportive counselling and education in
coping skills (e.g. problem solving skills, identification of negative thinking) from a registered psychologist.
CanCOPE had a similar focus to the PC intervention, though it was undertaken with couples to enhance
coping and support between patient and partner, primarily through the teaching of supportive communication
skills.
MI: Five 15-minute phone calls,
medical information booklets
6 and 12months
PC: Four 2-hour sessions: pre &
post-surgery, 1 week & 6-months
after; Two 30-minute phone calls 1
& 3-months post-surgery
CanCOPE: Five 2-hour sessions:
pre & post surgery, 1 week, 5
weeks & 6-months after; Two 30minute phone calls 1 & 3-months
post-surgery
Table 2. Delivery of couple-based interventions
Total length Total length
of
of
Delivery of
Author
intervention intervention
intervention
(minutes) (minutes) patient
partner
Badger et al.
(2007)
Badger et al.
(2010)
Telephone;
separate
Telephone;
separate
204
304
102
180
Experience of Intervention
Deliverers
Undergo specific training to
deliver intervention?
Followed specific
protocol to deliver
intervention?
Outline plans to
maintain treatment
fidelity
Psychiatric Nurse Counsellor (with
oncology expertise)
No
Yes
Yes
TIP-C: Masters-level nurse; social
worker with psychiatric and
oncology expertise
No
Yes
Yes
Advanced doctoral students in
clinical psychology, trained in couple
therapy and the effects of cancer on
relationships
No
Yes
Yes
Nurse
Yes
Yes
Yes
African-American, doctoral level
medical psychologist
Yes, systematic training of 6
the intervention sessions
Yes
Clinical psychologist undertaking
post-doctoral fellowship in psychooncology
Yes, 4-session seminar, 4day worshop, study of
intervention manual
Yes
HEAC: research assistants
Baucom et
al. (2009)
Face-toface;
counsellor
Budin et al.
(2008)
Telephone
& face-toface &
videos;
separate
Campbell et
al. (2006)
Telephone
Donnelly et
al. (2000)
Telephone
450
360
450
360
Yes
Total length
of
intervention
(minutes) patient
Total length
of
intervention
(minutes) partner
540
Author
Delivery of
intervention
Kayser et al.
2010
Face-toface;
counsellor
540
Kuijer et al.
(2004)
Face-toface;
counsellor
450
Kurtz et al.
(2005)
Face-to-face
and
telephone
Manne et al.
(2005)
Face-toface; group
McCorkle et
al. (2007)
Face-to-face
and
telephone
McLean et
al. (2008)
Face-toface;
counsellor
McLean et
al. (2011)
Face-to-face
Experience of Intervention
Deliverers
Undergo specific training to
deliver intervention?
Masters-level clinical social worker
Followed specific
protocol to deliver
intervention?
Outline plans to
maintain treatment
fidelity
Yes
Yes
Yes, 8-hour training program
450
540
480
540
480
Psychologist
No
Yes
No
Nurse
No
Yes
Yes
Unclear - Group intervention lead by
a small team of therapists (20
therapists used in total)
Yes, 6-hour training program
Yes
Yes
Advanced Practice Nurses, board
certified nurse practioners
No
Yes
No
Psychologists; doctoral candidate
No
Yes
No
Psychologist
Trained in Emotion Focused
Therapy
Yes
No
Total length
of
intervention
(minutes) patient
Total length
of
intervention
(minutes) partner
Experience of Intervention
Deliverers
Undergo specific training to
deliver intervention?
Followed specific
protocol to deliver
intervention?
Outline plans to
maintain treatment
fidelity
Yes, 15-hour training
program
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Masters-level nurse
Yes, 40-hour training
program
Yes
Yes
Masters-level nurse
Yes, 40-hour training
program
Yes
Yes
Masters-level therapist (social
worker or psychologist)
No
Yes
Yes
Three female psychologists,
experience ranged from 3-15 years
No
Yes
Yes
Author
Delivery of
intervention
Nezu et al.
(2003)
Face-toface;
counsellor
900
900
15 advanced psychology graduate
students & 3 social workers (all had
minimum masters degree and two
years field experience)
Northouse et
al. (2005)
Face-toface;
counsellor
330
330
Masters-level nurse
Northouse et
al. (2007)
Face-toface;
counsellor
330
Brief
FOCUS:
210
330
Brief
FOCUS:
210
Northouse et
al. (2011)
Face-toface;
counsellor
Porter et al.
(2009)
Face-toface;
counsellor
210
210
Scott et al.
(2004)
Face-toface;
counsellor
660
/14660
Extensive
FOCUS:
420
Extensive
FOCUS:
420
Table 3. Description of Patients and Partners
Patients
Partners
54.27 (6.44)
53.20 (4.51)
71.86
55.20
Caucasian
81.59
85.08
African-American
10.96
5.88
Hispanic
3.08
2.98
Asian
1.36
1.54
Other
3.01
4.34
Breast
49.83
Prostate
21.07
Gynaecological
2.17
Lung
9.74
Head & Neck
0.50
Leukaemia
1.63
Non-Hodgkins
0.17
Hodgkins
0.13
Gastrointestinal
11.12
Brain
0.33
Other
3.30
Stage I
27.72
Stage II
25.91
Stage III
21.18
Stage IV
25.19
Mean, SD, Age (years)
Gender, % female
Ethnicity, %
Cancer Site, %
Cancer Stage, %
Partner Relationship, %
Spouse
85.85
Family Member
10.32
Friend
3.83
High School or less
31.45
30.67
Some university/University
graduate
68.54
69.33
Education, %
Table 4. Patient Outcome Measures
Author
QoL
Badger et al.
(2007)
Badger et al.
(2010)
Spiritual
well-being:
subscale of
Quality of
Life-Breast
Cancer
Psychological
Distress
Depression:
Centre for
Epidemiologic
al Studies Depression
Scale (CESD)
Anxiety:
Positive and
Negative
Affect
Schedule
(PANAS; );
SF-12; Index
of Clinical
Stress
Depression:
Centre for
Epidemiologic
al Studies Depression
Scale (CESD)
Anxiety:
Positive and
Negative
Affect
Schedule
(PANAS; );
SF-12; Index
of Clinical
Stress
Physical
Distress
UCLA
Prostate
Cancer
Index;
Multidimen
sioanl
Fatigue
Inventory
(MFI)
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
Social wellbeing scale;
Perceived
Social
SupportFamily scale
(PSS-FA)
Marital
Functioning
Appraisal
Coping
SelfEfficacy
Communication
Problem solving
Author
Baucom et
al. (2009)
Budin et al.
(2008)
QoL
Psychological
Distress
Brief
Symptom
Inventory;
Posttraumatic
Growth
Inventory;
Functional
Assessment of
Cancer
TherapyBreast
(FACT-B);
Self-image
scale
Psychosocial
Adjustment to
Illness Scale Self Report
(PAIS-SR);
Profile of
Adaptation to
Life Clinical
Scale Psychological
Well-being
subscale
(PAL-C)
Physical
Distress
Brief
Fatigue
Inventory
(BFI);
Brief Pain
Inventory;
Rotterdam
Symptom
Scale
Self-rated
Health
Subscale
(SRHS);
PAL-C physical
symptoms
subscale;
Breast
Cancer
Treatment
Response
Inventory
(BCTRI);
BCTRI
Side
Effects
Severity
subscale
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
Derogatis
Inventory of
Sexual
Functioning
(DISF)
Marital
Functioning
Quality of
Marriage
Index (QMI)
PAIS- Vocational,
Domestic,
Social
subscale
Appraisal
Coping
SelfEfficacy
Communication
Problem solving
Author
QoL
Campbell et
al. (2006)
Short-Form
Health
Survey (SF36)
Kuijer et al.
(2004)
Kurtz et al.
(2005)
Physical
Distress
Sexuality
Expanded
Prostate
Cancer
Index
Composite
(EPIC)
Expanded
Prostate
Cancer Index
Composite
(EPIC)
Social
Adjustment
Marital
Functioning
Impact of
Event Scale
(IES); Mental
Health
Inventory
(MHI)
Donnelly et
al. (2000)
Kayser et al.
(2010)
Psychological
Distress
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyBreast
(FACT-B)
Centre for
Epidemiologic
al Studies Depression
Scale (CESD)
Depression:
Centre for
Epidemiologic
al Studies Depression
Scale (CESD)
0-10 Ladder
Medical
Outcomes
Study
(MOS);
Short-Form
Health
Survey
(SF-36)
Medical
Outcomes
Study
(MOS);
Short-Form
Health
Survey (SF36)
Appraisal
Coping
SelfEfficacy
Self-Efficacy
for Symptom
Control
Inventory
(SESCI)
Communication
Problem solving
Author
Manne et al.
2005
McCorkle et
al. (2007)
McLean et
al. (2008)
McLean et
al. (2011)
QoL
Psychological
Distress
Impact of
Event Scale
(IES); Mental
Health
Inventory
(MHI)
Depression:
Centre for
Epidemiologic
al Studies Depression
Scale (CESD)
Beck
Depression
Inventory
(BDI-II)
Beck
Depression
Inventory
(BDI-II);
Beck
Hopelessness
Scale (BHS)
Physical
Distress
Cancer
Rehabilitati
on
Evaluation
System
(CARES)
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
Marital
Functioning
Appraisal
Coping
Partner
Unsupportiv
e Behaviours
Scale (from
Partner
Responses to
Cancer
Inventory)
Cancer
Rehabilitatio
n Evaluation
System
(CARES)
Cancer
Rehabilitatio
n Evaluation
System
(CARES)
Revised
Dyadic
Adjustment
Scale
(RDAS)
Revised
Dyadic
Adjustment
Scale
(RDAS)
Relationship
-Focused
Coping Scale
(RFCS)
SelfEfficacy
Communication
Problem solving
Author
QoL
Nezu et al.
(2003)
Clinician
Rated
Northouse et
al. (2005)
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyBreast
(FACT-B);
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyGeneral
(FACT-G);
Short-Form
Health
Survey (SF36)
Psychological
Distress
Clinician
Rated:
Hamilton
Rating Scale
for
Depression;
Self-Report:
Profile of
Mood States
(POMS);
Brief
Symptom
Inventory
(BSI)
Partner
Rated: Katz
Adjustment
ScaleRelative’s
Form (KASR)
Physical
Distress
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
Marital
Functioning
Appraisal
Coping
SelfEfficacy
Communication
Problem solving
Social Problem
Solving Inventory
(SPSI-R)
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyBreast
(FACT-B);
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyGeneral
(FACT-G);
Short-Form
Health
Survey
(SF-36)
Brief Coping
Orientations
to Problems
Experienced
(BriefCOPE)
Uncertainty
: Mishel
Uncertainty
in Illness
Scale;
Hopelessnes
s: Beck
Hopelessnes
s Scale
(BHS)
Author
QoL
Northouse et
al. (2007)
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyGeneral
(FACT-G);
Short-Form
Health
Survey (SF36)
Northouse et
al. (2011)
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyGeneral
(FACT-G);
Short-Form
Health
Survey (SF36)
Porter et al.
(2009)
Psychological
Distress
Physical
Distress
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyGeneral
(FACT-G)
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
Marital
Functioning
Uncertainty
: Mishel
Uncertainty
in Illness
Scale;
Hopelessnes
s: Beck
Hopelessnes
s Scale
(BHS)
Illness:
Appraisal of
Illness Scale
Uncertainty
: Mishel
Uncertainty
in Illness
Scale;
Hopelessnes
s: Beck
Hopelessnes
s Scale
(BHS)
Expanded
Prostate
Cancer Index
Composite
(EPIC)
Risk of
Distress Scale
(RFD)
Profile of
Mood StatesShort Form
(POMS-SF)
Appraisal
Quality of
Marriage
Index
(QMI);
Miller Social
Intimacy
Scale
(MSIS)
Coping
Brief Coping
Orientations
to Problems
Experienced
(Brief-COPE
)
Brief Coping
Orientations
to Problems
Experienced
(Brief-COPE
)
SelfEfficacy
Lewis
Cancer SelfEfficacy
Scale
Communication
Lewis Mutuality
and
Interpersonal
Sensitivity Scale
Problem solving
Author
Scott et al.
(2004)
QoL
Psychological
Distress
Psychosocial
Adjustment to
Illness Scale Self Report
(PAIS-SR);
Impact of
Event Scale
(IES)
Physical
Distress
Sexuality
Sexual Self
Schema
(SSS) for
Women;
Brief Index
of Sexual
Functioning
(BISF)
Social
Adjustment
Marital
Functioning
Appraisal
Coping
Revised
Ways of
Coping
Questionnair
e - Cancer
Version
(WOC-CA)
SelfEfficacy
Communication
Qualitative
review of
interview; Coded
using rapid
interaction
coding system
Problem solving
Table 5. Partner Outcome Measures
Author
QoL
Badger et
al. (2007)
Badger et
al. (2010)
Baucom
et al.
(2009)
Spiritual
well-being:
subscale of
Quality of
Life-Breast
Cancer
Psychological
Distress
Depression:
Centre for
Epidemiological
Studies Depression
Scale (CES-D)
Anxiety:
Positive and
Negative Affect
Schedule
(PANAS; ); SF12; Index of
Clinical Stress
Depression:
Centre for
Epidemiological
Studies Depression
Scale (CES-D)
Anxiety:
Positive and
Negative Affect
Schedule
(PANAS; ); SF12; Index of
Clinical Stress
Brief Symptom
Inventory;
Posttraumatic
Growth
Inventory
Physical
Distress
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
Marital
Functioning
Social wellbeing scale;
Perceived
Social
SupportFamily
scale (PSSFA)
UCLA Prostate
Cancer Index;
Multidimensioanl
Fatigue
Inventory (MFI)
Derogatis
Inventory of
Sexual
Quality of
Marriage
Index
Appraisal
Coping
Selfefficacy
Communication
Problem Solving
Author
QoL
Budin et
al. (2008)
Profile of Mood
States- Short
Form (POMSSF); Caregiver
Strain Index
Campbell
et al.
(2006)
Impact of Event
Scale (IES);
Mental Health
Inventory
(MHI)
Donnelly
et al.
(2000)
Kayser et
al. 2010
Psychological
Distress
Psychosocial
Adjustment to
Illness Scale Self Report
(PAIS-SR);
Profile of
Adaptation to
Life Clinical
Scale Psychological
Well-being
subscale (PALC)
Quality of
Life
Questionnaire
for Spouses
(QL-SP);
Illness
intrusiveness
Rating Scale
(IIRS)
Physical
Distress
Self-rated Health
Subscale
(SRHS); PAL-C
- physical
symptoms
subscale
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
PAISVocational,
Domestic,
Social
subscale
Marital
Functioning
Appraisal
Coping
Selfefficacy
SelfEfficacy
for
Symptom
Control
Inventory
(SESCI)
Communication
Problem Solving
Author
Kuijer et
al. (2004)
Kurtz et
al. (2005)
Manne et
al. (2005)
McCorkle
et al.
(2007)
McLean
et al.
(2008)
QoL
Psychological
Distress
Centre for
Epidemiological
Studies Depression
Scale (CES-D)
Physical
Distress
Sexuality
Depression:
Centre for
Epidemiological
Studies Depression
Scale (CES-D)
Beck
Depression
Inventory (BDIII)
Marital
Functioning
Appraisal
Coping
Selfefficacy
0-10 Ladder
Medical
Outcomes
Study
(MOS);
Short-Form
Health
Survey (SF36)
Depression:
Centre for
Epidemiological
Studies Depression
Scale (CES-D)
Impact of Event
Scale (IES);
Mental Health
Inventory
(MHI)
Social
Adjustment
Cancer
Rehabilitation
Evaluation
System (CARES)
Cancer
Rehabilitation
Evaluation
System
(CARES)
Author's
own
mastery
index
Partner
Unsupportive
Behaviours
Scale (from
Partner
Responses to
Cancer
Inventory)
Cancer
Rehabilitation
Evaluation
System
(CARES)
Revised
Dyadic
Adjustment
Scale
(RDAS)
Communication
Problem Solving
Author
QoL
McLean
et al.
(2011)
Psychological
Distress
Beck
Depression
Inventory (BDIII); Beck
Hopelessness
Scale (BHS);
Caregiver
Burden Scale
(Time
subscale);
Caregiver
Burden
Subscale
(Difficulty
subscale)
Physical
Distress
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
Marital
Functioning
Appraisal
Coping
Selfefficacy
Problem Solving
Revised
Dyadic
Adjustment
Scale
(RDAS)
Social Problem
Solving
Inventory (SPSIR)
Nezu et
al. (2003)
Northouse
et al.
(2005)
Communication
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyGeneral
(FACT-G);
Short-Form
Health
Survey (SF36)
Functional
Assessment of
Cancer TherapyGeneral (FACTG)
Expanded
Prostate
Cancer Index
Composite
(EPIC)
Uncertainty:
Mishel
Uncertainty in
Illness Scale;
Hopelessness:
Beck
Hopelessness
Scale (BHS)
Caregiving:
Appraisal of
Caregiving
Scale
Brief Coping
Orientations
to Problems
Experienced
(Brief-COPE
)
Lewis
Cancer
SelfEfficacy
Scale
Author
QoL
Northouse
et al.
(2007)
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
Treatment
(FACT-G;
alpha .90)
Northouse
et al.
(2011)
Functional
Assessment
of Cancer
TherapyGeneral
(FACT-G);
Short-Form
Health
Survey (SF36)
Porter et
al. (2009)
Scott et
al. (2004)
Psychological
Distress
Physical
Distress
Functional
Assessment of
Cancer
Treatment
(FACT-G; alpha
.90)
Sexuality
Social
Adjustment
Marital
Functioning
Uncertainty:
Mishel
Uncertainty in
Illness Scale;
Hopelessness:
Beck
Hopelessness
Scale (BHS)
Illness:
Appraisal of
Illness Scale
Expanded
Prostate
Cancer Index
Composite
(EPIC)
Uncertainty:
Mishel
Uncertainty in
Illness Scale;
Hopelessness:
Beck
Hopelessness
Scale (BHS)
Risk of Distress
Scale (RFD)
Coping
Brief Coping
Orientations
to Problems
Experienced
(Brief-COPE
)
Selfefficacy
Communication
Lewis Mutuality
and
Interpersonal
Sensitivity Scale
Brief Coping
Orientations
to Problems
Experienced
(Brief-COPE
)
Quality of
Marriage
Index (QMI);
Miller Social
Intimacy
Scale (MSIS)
Profile of Mood
States- Short
Form (POMSSF)
Psychosocial
Adjustment to
Illness Scale Self Report
(PAIS-SR);
Impact of Event
Scale (IES)
Appraisal
Sexual Self
Schema
(SSS) for
Women;
Brief Index of
Sexual
Functioning
(BISF)
Revised
Ways of
Coping
Questionnaire
- Cancer
Version
(WOC-CA)
Qualitative
review of
interview;
Coded using
rapid interaction
coding system
Problem Solving