gms | German Medical Science

18. Deutscher Kongress für Versorgungsforschung

Deutsches Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung e. V.

09. - 11.10.2019, Berlin

Evaluation of Cancer Counselling Centres: A Scoping Review

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • Solveigh Lingens - Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf (UKE), Institut und Poliklinik für Medizinische Psychologie, Hamburg, Germany
  • Holger Schulz - Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Institut und Poliklinik für Medizinische Psychologie, Hamburg, Germany
  • Christiane Bleich - Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Institut und Poliklinik für Medizinische Psychologie, Hamburg, Germany

18. Deutscher Kongress für Versorgungsforschung (DKVF). Berlin, 09.-11.10.2019. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2019. Doc19dkvf343

doi: 10.3205/19dkvf343, urn:nbn:de:0183-19dkvf3432

Veröffentlicht: 2. Oktober 2019

© 2019 Lingens et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open-Access-Artikel und steht unter den Lizenzbedingungen der Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (Namensnennung). Lizenz-Angaben siehe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.


Gliederung

Text

Background: A diagnosis of cancer leaves most cancer patients and their relatives with an increased psychological burden. Throughout the course of the illness social, occupational or legal changes may also lead to psychological distress. A holistic source of psychosocial support is offered by Cancer Counselling Centres (CCCs). Compared to psychotherapy CCCs provide easy and fast access and are usually free of charge. The services offer psychological, social and legal support for cancer patients and their relatives. However, little is known about the effectiveness of CCC services. Therefore, this scoping review aims to provide an overview of current literature assessing the effectiveness of face to face counselling at CCCs in improving cancer patients’ quality of life.

Methods: Databases searched are PubMed (Medline), Ovid (PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, Medline, PsycArticle), Web of Science, Google Scholar, Cochrane and Embase. The systematic search is conducted by two independent researchers. Studies included have to be written in German or English, peer-reviewed, published and have to contain at least one outcome measure. Studies that assessed psychotherapy, online support or telephone counselling are excluded. The review is conducted according to PRISMA guidelines.

Results: A total of 1786 articles were identified searching all databases. After excluding duplicates, screening titles, abstracts and full-texts, 15 studies matching the criteria were identified. Most studies were cross-sectional with only one measurement point and did not included a control group. Few studies were prospective with no control group. The most common outcome measures across studies were concerns and satisfaction with the counselling.

Conclusion: The current literature on the effectiveness of CCCs lacks high quality designs such as RCTs. Therefore the effectiveness of CCCs with regard to quality of life remains uncertain. Longitudinal controlled studies are necessary to stress the importance of CCCs.