Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore lived experiences of partners of breast cancer survivors. Methods: A descriptive phenomenological study approach was used. Participants were purposively sampled from a University hospital in Turkey. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with 12 partners of breast cancer survivors. Results: Three themes were identified: difficulties, re-adaptation to life, and new perspectives in life. Conclusion: Healthcare professionals should investigate the stressors and psychosocial well-being of the partners in follow-ups. In addition, partners should be supported with psychoeducational programs for understanding women’s changes, post-treatment symptom management, emotional expression and open communication. Özet: Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı meme kanseri tedavisini tamamlamış kadınların eşlerinin yaşam deneyimlerinin açıklanmasıdır. Yöntem: Çalışmada tanımlayıcı fenomenoloji yaklaşımı kullanılmıştır. Katılımcılar bir Üniversitesi hastanesinden amaçlı örnekleme yöntemi ile belirlenmiştir. Yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler 12 eşle yürütülmüştür. Bulgular: Çalışmada güçlükler, yaşama yeniden adaptasyon ve yaşamda yeni bakış açıları olmak üzere üç tema belirlenmiştir. Sonuç: Sağlık profesyonelleri tedavi sonrası dönem izlemlerinde eşlerin stresörlerini ve psikososyal iyi oluşluklarını değerlendirmelidirler. Ayrıca, eşler, tedavi sonrası semptom yönetimi, kadının deneyimlediği değişimler, duygu ifadesi ve açık iletişim konularında psikoeğitsel müdahalelerle desteklenmelidir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Eşler, meme kanseri, tedavi sonrası dönem, kalitatif araştırma.
1. American Cancer Society, 2019. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2019-2020. Atlanta: American Cancer Society, Inc. 2019. Available online: https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/breast-cancer-facts-and-figures/breast-cancer-facts-and-figures-2019-2020.pdf. [Accessed 10 th March , 2020].
2. Özmen V, Özmen T and Doğru V. Breast cancer in Turkey; An analysis of 20.000 patients with breast cancer. Eur J Breast Health. 2019; 15(3): 141-6. DOI:10.5152/ejbh.2019.4890.
3. Lillie HM, Venetis MK and Chernichky-Karcher SM. “He would never let me just give up”: Communicatively constructing dyadic resilience in the experience of breast cancer. Health Commun. 2018; 33(12): 1516-24. DOI:10.1080/10410236.2017.1372049.
4. Şengün İnan F and Üstün B. Biopsychosocial changes in post-treatment period of breast cancer. Eur J Breast Health. 2013; 9: 48-51. DOI:10.5152/tjbh.2013.03.
5. Ploos van Amstel FK, van den Berg SW, van Laarhoven HW, et al. Distress screening remains important during follow-up after primary breast cancer treatment. Support Care Cancer. 2013; 21(8): 2107-15. DOI:10.1007/s00520-013-1764-0.
6. Jakobsen K, Magnus E, Lundgren S, et al. Everyday life in breast cancer survivors experiencing challenges: A qualitative study. Scand J Occup Ther. 2018; 25(4): 298-307. DOI:10.1080/11038128.2017.1335777.
7. Keesing S, Rosenwax L and McNamara B. A dyadic approach to understanding the impact of breast cancer on relationships between partners during early survivorship. BMC Womens Health. 2016; 16(1): 1-14. DOI:10.1186/s12905-016-0337-z.
8. Kinsinger SW, Laurenceau JP, Carver CS, et al. Perceived partner support and psychosexual adjustment to breast cancer. Psychol Health. 2011; 26(12): 1571-1588. DOI:10.1080/08870446.2010.533771.
9. Talley A, Molix L, Schlegel RJ, et al. The influence of breast cancer survivors' perceived partner social support and need satisfaction on depressive symptoms: a longitudinal analysis. Psychol Health. 2010; 25(4): 433-49. DOI:10.1080/08870440802582682.
10. Segrin C and Badger TA. Psychological and physical distress are interdependent in breast cancer survivors and their partners. Psychol Health Med. 2014; 19(6): 716-23. DOI:10.1080/13548506.2013.871304.
11. Şengün İnan F and Üstün B. Experiences of Turkish survivors of breast cancer: Neuman Systems Model Perspective. Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2016; 13: 466-77. DOI:10.1111/jjns.12129.
12. Fang SY, Chang HT and Shu BC. The moderating effect of perceived partner empathy on body image and depression among breast cancer survivors. Psychooncology. 2015; 24(12): 1815-22. DOI:10.1002/pon.3868.
13. Lim JW, Paek MS and Shon EJ. Gender and role differences in couples communication during cancer survivorship. Cancer Nurs. 2015; 38(3): E51-60. DOI:10.1097/NCC.0000000000000191.
14. Yamamoto S, Tazumi K and Arao H. Support not corresponding to transition to a new treatment: Women's perceptions of support provided by their male partners during hormonal therapy. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2015;10(1):292-83. DOI:10.3402/qhw.v10.29283.
15. Chung C and Hwang E. Couples' experiences of breast cancer in Korea: A descriptive qualitative study. Cancer Nurs. 2012; 35(3): 211-20. DOI:10.1097/NCC.0b013e31822a60db.
16. Gursoy A, Kocan S and Aktug C. Nothing is more important than my partner's health: Turkish men's perspectives on partner's appearance after mastectomy and alopecia. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2017; 29: 23–30. DOI:10.1016/j.ejon.2017.04.006.
17. Çömez S and Karayurt Ö. We as spouses have experienced a real disaster!: a qualitative study of women with breast cancer and their spouses. Cancer Nurs. 2016; 39(5): E19-28. DOI:10.1097/NCC.0000000000000306.
18. Wagner CD, Das LT, Bigatti SM et al. Characterizing burden, caregiving benefits, and psychological distress of husbands of breast cancer patients during treatment and beyond. Cancer Nurs. 2011; 34(4): E21-30. DOI:10.1097/NCC.0b013e31820251f5.
19. Gao L, Liu JE, Zhou XP et al. Supporting her as the situation changes: A qualitative study of spousal support strategies for patients with breast cancer in China. Eur J Cancer Care. 2020; 29(1): e13176. DOI:10.1111/ecc.13176.
20. Lopez KA and Willis DG. Descriptive versus interpretive phenomenology: Their contributions to nursing knowledge. Qual Health Res. 2004; 14(5): 726-35. DOI:10.1177/1049732304263638.
21. Morrow R, Rodriguez A and King N. Colaizzi’s descriptive phenomenological method. The Psychologist. 2015; 28(8): 643-44.
22. Tong A, Sainsbury P and Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32- item checklist for interviews and focus group. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349-57. DOI:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.
23. Lincoln SY and Guba GE. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. 1985.
24. Pauwels E, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Charlier C, et al. Psychosocial characteristics associated with breast cancer survivors’ intimate partners’ needs for information and support after primary breast cancer treatment. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2012; 30(1):1-20. DOI:10.1080/07347332.2011.633982.
25. Adams E, Boulton M, Rose PW, et al. A qualitative study exploring the experience of the partners of cancer survivors and their views on the role of primary care. Support Care Cancer. 2012; 20(11): 2785-94. DOI:10.1007/s00520-012-1400-4.
26. Janz NK, Li Y, Beesley LJ, et al. Worry about recurrence in a multi-ethnic population of breast cancer survivors and their partners. Support Care Cancer. 2016; 24(11): 4669-78. DOI:10.1007/s00520-016-3314-z.
27. Dorros SM, Segrin C, and Badger TA. Cancer survivors’ and partners’ key concerns and quality of life. Psychol Health. 2017; 32(11): 1407-27. DOI:10.1080/08870446.2017.
28. Miller LE and Caughlin JP. “We're going to be survivors”: couples' identity challenges during and after cancer treatment. Communication Monographs. 2013;80(1):63-82. DOI:10.1080/03637751.2012.739703.
29. Arnedo CO and Casellas-Grau A. Vicarious or secondary post-traumatic growth: how are positive changes transmitted to significant others after experiencing a traumatic event? In: Martin C, Preedy V and Patel V. (eds), Comprehensive Guide to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders. Springer, Cham. 2016; 1762-82. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-08359-9_76.
30. Li Q and Loke AY. The positive aspects of caregiving for cancer patients: a critical review of the literature and directions for future research. Psychooncology. 2013; 22(11): 2399-407. DOI:10.1002/pon.3311.