Experiences of living with advanced colorectal cancer from two perspectives – Inside and outside
Introduction
Being diagnosed with colorectal cancer today can mean living a long time with the disease and the treatment. Knowledge and understanding about the impact of the disease and treatment on daily life are important, if optimal nursing care is to be provided during this period.
Every year about 5000 people are diagnosed with colorectal cancer in Sweden; it is the second most common type of cancer (Socialstyrelsen, 2007). Improved methods of treatment have increased survival rates, but have also changed the course of the disease from being short and often fatal to becoming a chronic disease with the possibility of living with it for years. Primary treatment is often surgery, with complementary chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In those for whom the disease is advanced and a cure is no longer possible, chemotherapy is a major treatment option. A variety of new drugs and combinations have allowed palliative treatment to be offered that may continue for years. This means that a growing number of people are living with the disease for a longer period of time (Socialstyrelsen, 2007).
Being diagnosed with colorectal cancer affects life in different ways. A range of physical problems have been identified, such as fatigue, pain, impaired bowel and sexual dysfunction (Sprangers et al., 1993, Arndt et al., 2004). Having a colostomy can also be a consequence of the disease leading to an altered body image, higher levels of anxiety and depression, and a lower quality of life in persons with a stoma compared to those with no stoma (Sahay et al., 2000, Cotrim and Pereira, 2008). However, non-stoma patients also suffer from physical impairments such as impaired bowel and sexual function (Sprangers et al., 1995). Colorectal cancer in all stages also often results in deficits in emotional and social functioning and in quality of life of the person with the disease (Arndt et al., 2004). When the disease is in an advanced stage, there are often more severe colorectal symptoms and a lower quality of life (Simon et al., 2008). Dunn et al. (2006) stated after a systematic literature review of quality of life issues for colorectal cancer patients that there is a lack of studies using qualitative methodology and reflecting the patients’ perspective.
When a person suffers from cancer it also affects close family and friends, especially when the disease is advanced (Esbensen and Thomé, 2010). The partner is often the closest person, and he or she can play a vital role in providing important emotional and practical support (Emslie et al., 2009, Altschuler et al., 2009). Research into the effect on partners of cancer patients in general has focused mainly on psychosocial consequences or gender differences (Goldzweig et al., 2009, Emslie et al., 2009). Psychiatric morbidity with higher levels of depression and anxiety than a general population has been shown (Braun et al., 2007, Cotrim and Pereira, 2008). Northouse et al. (2000) found that partners reported significantly more emotional distress than patients.
In a previous study the authors examined health and healthcare use by the partners of cancer patients two years following the cancer diagnosis. The results showed that the partners of patients with colorectal cancer have a two-to-three times higher rate of psychiatric diagnosis. The authors also found a 25% increase in circulatory diseases, and healthcare costs were increased especially among this group of partners due to an increased use of healthcare (Sjövall et al., 2009). The authors also studied sick leave in this group, and found that a psychiatric diagnosis was the reason for sick leave in more than 40% of the cases (Sjövall et al., 2010). Thus, the results indicate that partners of persons with colon cancer might be more vulnerable or at risk of impaired health than partners of those with other cancer diagnoses, such as breast or prostate cancer.
As this is a relatively new and growing group, there is a need for more knowledge about how a person with advanced colorectal cancer and his/her partner experience their daily life and how the disease and treatment affect them. There is a particular need of qualitative studies, to increase knowledge and provide a deeper understanding of the life situation of persons with advanced colorectal cancer and their partners. In this study we interviewed, analysed and report findings from patients and partners separately in two groups. The purpose of this study was to investigate how the life situation of persons with advanced colorectal cancer and their partners is affected by living with the disease and its treatment.
Section snippets
Design
A qualitative design was chosen as the most appropriate for capturing the perspectives of persons with advanced colorectal cancer and their partners, for understanding them from their own frame of reference. In the tradition of naturalistic inquiry, reality is considered to be constructed in the perception of the individual (Lincoln and Guba, 1985). The meaning is subjective; and thus understanding other human beings has to involve their experience of the situation; hence interviewing was
Results
Three main categories emerged from the interview text of the persons with cancer. These are presented in Table 1 with their sub themes. Two main categories emerged from the interview text of the partners. These are presented in Table 2 with their sub themes.
Discussion
The importance of treatment and belonging to the system for persons with colorectal cancer was expressed as both in terms of being treated and belonging to the system and as being shut out of the system. Yost et al. (2008) showed that perceived quality of care was found to be a predictor for health-related quality of life in such aspects as physical function and wellbeing, social and family wellbeing, and also emotional wellbeing. Thus, a patient’s perception of care and feelings of belonging
Conclusion
When one person in a partner relationship suffers from advanced colorectal cancer, it changes life and life perspective for both partners. The findings from our study show that partners might be an important source of support for the person with colorectal cancer, and need to be invited to or involved in the care provided. Nursing and planning for care should focus on supporting the couples’ striving for normality in daily life, as the disease and its treatment may last for a longer period of
Conflict of interest
All the authors of this study certify that are no conflicts of interest to declare.
References (28)
A method of analysing interview transcripts in qualitative research
Nurse Education Today
(1991)- et al.
Impact of colorectal cancer on patient and family: Implications for care
European Journal of Oncology Nursing
(2008) - et al.
Getting through not going under: a qualitative study of gender and spousal support after diagnosis with colorectal cancer
Social Science and Medicine
(2009) - et al.
A systematic review of quantitative studies reporting selected patient experienced outcomes, with a specific focus on gender differences in people with colorectal cancer
European Journal of Oncology Nursing
(2009) - et al.
Couples pattern of adjustment to colon cancer
Social Science and Medicine
(2000) Patients experiences of feeling on their own following a diagnosis of colorectal cancer: a phenomenological approach
International Journal of Nursing Studies
(2001)- et al.
The influence of husbands’ or male partners’ support on women’s psychosocial adjustment to having a ostomy resulting from colorectal cancer
Journal of Wound Ostomy Continence Nurse
(2009) - et al.
Being a close relative of a dying person: development of the concepts “Involvement in the light and in the dark”
Cancer Nursing
(2000) - et al.
Quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer 1 year after diagnosis compared with the general population: a population based study
Journal of Clinical Oncology
(2004) - et al.
The meaning of the lived experiences of hope in patients with cancer in palliative home care
Palliative Medicine
(2001)
Hidden morbidity in cancer: spouse caregivers
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Analysing and presenting qualitative data
British Dental Journal
The lived experience of Lebanese family caregivers of cancer patients
Cancer Nursing
Dimensions of quality of life and psychosocial variables most salient to colorectal cancer patients
Psycho-Oncology
Cited by (34)
Experiences and Perceptions of Patients with Oxaliplatin-Induced Cold Sensitivity in Turkey: A Qualitative Study
2023, Seminars in Oncology NursingHealthcare experiences of people with advanced colorectal cancer: A qualitative study
2023, European Journal of Oncology NursingThe long haul: Lived experiences of survivors following different treatments for advanced colorectal cancer: A qualitative study
2022, European Journal of Oncology NursingCitation Excerpt :Thus, survivorship care, historically limited to early-stage diagnoses, is extending to the advanced setting (Langbaum and Smith, 2019). Advanced cancer survivorship may be different to early-stage survivorship, since people with advanced CRC are living with uncertain prognoses, grappling with existential challenges, and undergoing continuous or recurrent bouts of treatment (Houldin and Lewis, 2006; Sjövall et al., 2011). It is also likely that advanced CRC survivorship experiences may vary according to the treatment received.
Living in the moment for people approaching the end of life: A concept analysis
2020, International Journal of Nursing StudiesA systematic review of the supportive care needs of people living with and beyond cancer of the colon and/or rectum
2017, European Journal of Oncology NursingCitation Excerpt :Of these, 98 were excluded due to various reasons (Fig. 1). Fifty-four studies (Anderson et al., 2013; Andersson et al., 2010; Bain and Campbell, 2000; Bain et al., 2002; Baravelli et al., 2009; Beaver et al., 2010, 1999; Beckjord et al., 2008; Boudioni et al., 2001; Browne et al., 2011; Carlsson et al., 2010; Cha et al., 2012; Di Fabio et al., 2008; Dunn et al., 2006; Galloway and Graydon, 1996; Hansen et al., 2013; Harrison et al., 2011; Ho et al., 2016; Holm et al., 2012; Husson, 2013; Jefford et al., 2011; Jorgensen et al., 2012; Kidd, 2014; Klemm et al., 2000; Knowles et al., 1999; Lam et al., 2016; Landers et al., 2014; Li et al., 2012; Lithner et al., 2015, 2012; Macvean et al., 2007; McCaughan et al., 2012; Morrison et al., 2012; Nikoletti et al., 2008; Northouse et al., 1999; Papagrigoriadis and Heyman, 2003; Pullar et al., 2012; Ran et al., 2016; Rozmovits et al., 2004; Russell et al., 2015; Sahay and Gray, 2000; Salamonsen et al., 2016; Salkeld et al., 2004; Salz et al., 2014; Sanoff et al., 2010; Santin et al., 2015; Shun et al., 2014; Sjövall et al., 2011; Taylor et al., 2012; Traa et al., 2014; Walling et al., 2016; Wiljer et al., 2013; Worster and Holmes, 2008; Zullig et al., 2012) met eligibility criteria and were considered for further analysis. All studies were descriptive and observational; 12 (22%) collected data at multiple time-points (see Table S3).