Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 5/2015

01-05-2015

Predicting participation in meaningful activity for older adults with cancer

Auteurs: Mackenzi Pergolotti, Malcolm P. Cutchin, Hyman B. Muss

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 5/2015

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

Participation in activity that is personally meaningful leads to improved emotional and physical well-being and quality of life. However, little is known about what predicts participation in meaningful activity by older adults with cancer.

Methods

Seventy-one adults aged 65 years and older with a diagnosis of cancer were enrolled. All adults were evaluated with the following: a brief geriatric assessment, the meaningful activity participation assessment (MAPA), and the Possibilities for Activity Scale (PActS). The MAPA measures participation in meaningful activity, and the PActS measures what older adults believe they should and could be doing. A regression approach was used to assess the predictors of meaningful activity participation.

Results

The PActS (B = .56, p < .001) was the strongest predictor of meaningful activity participation.

Conclusions

What older adults with cancer feel they should and could do significantly predicted meaningful participation in activities above and beyond clinical and demographic factors. In future research, perceptions of possibilities for activity may be useful in the design of interventions targeted to improve meaningful participation in older adults with cancer.
vorige artikel Identifying changes in scores on the EORTC-QLQ-C30 representing a change in patients’ supportive care needs
volgende artikel Insomnia, hypnotic use, and health-related quality of life in a nationally representative sample
Literatuur
1.
Hurria, A. (2009). Geriatric assessment in oncology practice. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 57(s2), s246–s249.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Wedding, U., Röhrig, B., Klippstein, A., Pientka, L., & Höffken, K. (2007). Age, severe comorbidity and functional impairment independently contribute to poor survival in cancer patients. Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, 133(12), 945–950.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Oken, M. M., Creech, R. H., Tormey, D. C., Horton, J., Davis, T. E., McFadden, E. T., et al. (1982). Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. American Journal of Clinical Oncology, 5(6), 649–656.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Karnofsky, D., & Burchenal, J. (1991). The clinical evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents in cancer. In C. M. Macleod (Ed.), Evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents (pp. 191–205). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
5.
Crooks, V., Waller, S., Smith, T., & Hahn, T. J. (1991). The use of the Karnofsky Performance Scale in determining outcomes and risk in geriatric outpatients. Journal of Gerontology, 46(4), M139–M144.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Bellury, L. M., Ellington, L., Beck, S. L., Stein, K., Pett, M., & Clark, J. (2011). Elderly cancer survivorship: An integrative review and conceptual framework. European Journal of Oncology Nursing, 15(3), 233–242.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Dijkers, M. P. (2010). Issues in the conceptualization and measurement of participation: An overview. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91(9), S5–S16.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Grunfeld, E. (2006). Looking beyond survival: How are we looking at survivorship? Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24(32), 5166–5169.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Hewitt, M., & Simone, J. V. (1999). Ensuring quality cancer care. Washington: National Academies Press.
10.
Desrosiers, J. (2005). Participation and occupation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy/Revue Canadienne D’Ergothérapie, 72(4), 195–203.
11.
Law, M. (2002). Participation in the occupations of everyday life. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56(6), 640–649.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Vessby, K., & Kjellberg, A. (2010). Participation in occupational therapy research: A literature review. The British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73(7), 319–326.CrossRef
13.
Wilcock, A., Van Der Arend, H., Darling, K., Scholz, J., Sidall, R., Snigg, C., et al. (1998). An exploratory study of people’s perceptions and experiences of wellbeing. The British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 61(2), 75–82.CrossRef
14.
Palmadottir, G. (2010). The role of occupational participation and environment among Icelandic women with breast cancer: A qualitative study. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 17(4), 299–307.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Unruh, A. M., & Elvin, N. (2004). In the eye of the dragon: Women’s experience of breast cancer and the occupation of dragon boat racing. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy Revue Canadienne D’ergotherapie, 71(3), 138–149.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Rudman, D. L. (2010). Occupational terminology: Occupational possibilities. Journal of Occupational Science, 17(1), 55–59.CrossRef
17.
Rudman, D. L. (2005). Understanding political influences on occupational possibilities: An analysis of newspaper constructions of retirement. Journal of Occupational Science, 12(3), 149–160.CrossRef
18.
Rudman, D. L. (2006). Shaping the active, autonomous and responsible modern retiree: An analysis of discursive technologies and their links with neo-liberal political rationality. Ageing and Society, 26(2), 181.CrossRef
19.
Organization, W. H. (2002). Towards a common language for functioning, disability and health: ICF (pp. 8–9). Geneva: WHO.
20.
Schreiber, D., Bell, R. S., Wunder, J. S., O’Sullivan, B., Turcotte, R., Masri, B. A., et al. (2006). Evaluating function and health related quality of life in patients treated for extremity soft tissue sarcoma. Quality of Life Research, 15(9), 1439–1446.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Ness, K. K., Wall, M. M., Oakes, J. M., Robison, L. L., & Gurney, J. G. (2006). Physical performance limitations and participation restrictions among cancer survivors: A population-based study. Annals of Epidemiology, 16(3), 197–205.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Eakman, A. M., Carlson, M. E., & Clark, F. A. (2010). The meaningful activity participation assessment: A measure of engagement in personally valued activities. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 70(4), 299–317.CrossRef
23.
Eakman, A. M. (2007). A reliability and validity study of the meaningful activity participation assessment. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest.
24.
Hurria, A., Cirrincione, C. T., Muss, H. B., Kornblith, A. B., Barry, W., Artz, A. S., et al. (2011). Implementing a Geriatric Assessment in Cooperative Group Clinical Cancer Trials: CALGB 360401. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 29(10), 1290–1296.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
25.
Mor, V., Laliberte, L., Morris, J. N., & Wiemann, M. (1984). The Karnofsky performance status scale: An examination of its reliability and validity in a research setting. Cancer, 53(9), 2002–2007.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Schag, C. C., Heinrich, R. L., & Ganz, P. A. (1984). cKarnofsky performance status revisited: Reliability, validity, and guidelines. Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2(3), 187–193.
27.
Yates, J. W., Chalmer, B., & McKegney, F. P. (1980). Evaluation of patients with advanced cancer using the Karnofsky performance status. Cancer, 45(8), 2220–2224.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Bennie, S., Bruner, K., Dizon, A., Fritz, H., Goodman, B., & Peterson, S. (2003). Measurements of balance: Comparison of the Timed “Up and Go” test and Functional Reach test with the Berg Balance Scale. Journal of Physical Therapy Science, 15(2), 93–97.CrossRef
29.
Podsiadlo, D., & Richardson, S. (1991). The timed up and go—A test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 39(2), 142–148.PubMed
30.
Hurria, A., Gupta, S., Zauderer, M., Zuckerman, E. L., Cohen, H. J., Muss, H., et al. (2005). Developing a cancer-specific geriatric assessment. Cancer, 104(9), 1998–2005.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Loprinzi, C. L., Laurie, J. A., Wieand, H. S., Krook, J. E., Novotny, P. J., Kugler, J. W., et al. (1994). Prospective evaluation of prognostic variables from patient-completed questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 12(3), 601–607.PubMed
32.
Sherbourne, C. D., & Stewart, A. L. (1991). The MOS social support survey. Social Science and Medicine, 32(6), 705–714.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Pergolotti. M., & Cutchin. M. (in press). Possibilities for Activity Scale: Development, validity and reliability. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy.
34.
Nathans, L. L., Oswald, F. L., & Nimon, K. (2012). Interpreting multiple linear regression: A guidebook of variable importance. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(9), 2.
35.
Quick, J. M. (2010). Statistical analysis with R. Birhmingham, UK: Packt Publishing Ltd.
36.
Gelman, A. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Everard, K. M., Lach, H. W., Fisher, E. B., & Baum, M. C. (2000). Relationship of activity and social support to the functional health of older adults. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 55(4), S208–S212.CrossRef
38.
Barber, M. D. (2006). Occupational science and the first-person perspective. Journal of Occupational Science, 13(1), 94–96.CrossRef
39.
Cutchin, M. P., & Dickie, V. A. (2011). Transactionalism: Occupational science and the pragmatic afinude. In G. E. Whiteford & C. Hocking (Eds.), Occupational science: Society, inclusion, participation (pp. 23–38).
40.
Dickie, V., Cutchin, M. P., & Humphry, R. (2006). Occupation as transactional experience: A critique of individualism in occupational science. Journal of Occupational Science, 13(1), 83–93.CrossRef
41.
Pierce, D., Atler, K., Baltisberger, J., Fehringer, E., Hunter, E., Malkawi, S., et al. (2010). Occupational science: A data-based American perspective. Journal of Occupational Science, 17(4), 204–215.CrossRef
42.
Berkman, L. F., Glass, T., Brissette, I., & Seeman, T. E. (2000). From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium. Social Science and Medicine, 51(6), 843–857.CrossRefPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Predicting participation in meaningful activity for older adults with cancer
Auteurs
Mackenzi Pergolotti
Malcolm P. Cutchin
Hyman B. Muss
Publicatiedatum
01-05-2015
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 5/2015
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0849-7

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2015

Quality of Life Research 5/2015 Naar de uitgave

Patient Engagement Special Section

Building new roles and relationships in research: a model of patient engagement research

Editorial

Introduction to special section on patient engagement

Patient Engagement Special Section

Patient and public engagement in health-related quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research: what is important and why should we care? Findings from the first ISOQOL patient engagement symposium

OriginalPaper

Measuring caregiver outcomes in palliative care: a construct validation study of two instruments for use in economic evaluations

Patient Engagement Special Section

Gaps between patients’ reported current and preferred abilities versus clinicians’ emphases during an episode of care: Any agreement?

Review

Evaluation of cross-cultural adaptation and measurement properties of breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaires: a systematic review