Search

BackgroundIn metastatic colorectal cancer (CRCm), fatigue is pervasive, reduces quality of life, and is negatively associated with survival. Its course is explained in part by psychosocial variables such as emotional distress, coping strategies, or perceived control. Thus, to reduce fatigue, psychosocial interventions appear to be relevant. In some cancers, Cognitive Behavioral Therapies (CBT) reduce fatigue. Hypnosis is also used as a complementary therapy to reduce the side effects of cancer. While CBT requires specific training often reserved for psychologists, hypnosis has the advantage of being increasingly practiced by caregivers and is therefore less expensive (Montgomery et al., 2007). On the other hand, CBT and hypnosis remain understudied in the CRC, do not focus on the symptom of fatigue and in Europe such programs have never been evaluated.ObjectivesImplementing an intervention in a healthcare setting is complex (e.g., economic and practical aspects) and recruiting participants can be challenging. The primary objective will therefore be to study the feasibility of two standardized interventions (hypnosis and CBT) that aim to reduce fatigue in patients with CRCm treated in a French cancer center.Methods and designA prospective, single-center, randomized interventional feasibility study, using mixed methods (both quantitative and qualitative). A total of 60 patients will be allocated to each intervention group [Hypnosis (n = 30) and CBT (n = 30)]. Participants will be randomized into two parallel groups (ratio 1:1). Both programs will consist of 6 weekly sessions focusing on the CRF management over a period of 6 weeks. Trained therapists will conduct the program combining 3 face-to-face sessions and 3 online sessions. The feasibility and experience of interventions will be evaluated by the outcome variables, including the adhesion rate, the reasons for acceptability, relevance or non-adherence, the satisfaction, the fatigue evolution (with ecological momentary assessments), and the quality of life. All questionnaires will be self-assessment using an online application from the cancer center.DiscussionResults will highlight the barriers/facilitators to the implementation of the program and the relevance of the program to the patients, and will be used to generate hypotheses for a randomized control trial.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04999306; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04999306.

IntroductionIndividuals with brain injuries experience cognitive and emotional changes that have long-lasting impacts on everyday life. In the context of rehabilitation, surveys have stressed the importance of compensating for memory disturbances to ease the impact of disorders on day-to-day autonomy. Despite extensive research on the nature of neurocognitive impairments following brain injury, few studies have looked at patients’ perceptions of these day-to-day compensations. This study examines these perceptions; in particular, what brain-injured people believe they do to compensate for memory deficiencies in everyday life. It also investigates the determinants of reported compensation strategies (age, gender, perceived stress, change awareness and motivation to succeed).MethodsEighty patients and 80 controls completed the French Memory Compensation Questionnaire, a self-report measure of everyday memory compensation. Five forms of compensation were investigated: External and Internal strategies, Reliance on social help, and investments in Time and Effort, along with two general factors: the degree of importance attached to Success (motivation) and perceptions of Change. Participants also completed measures of demographic and emotional aspects that may affect everyday compensation perceptions.ResultsThe brain-injured group reported significantly more frequent use of memory compensation strategies than controls, with the exception of External aids. Large effects were observed for Reliance and Effort. Demographic, motivation and perception of change determinants were found to have different effects depending on the compensation strategy, and mediated the direct effect of brain injury on reported compensation.ConclusionClinical and rehabilitation neuropsychologists often seek to have a better sense of how their patients perceive their compensatory behaviors. In practice, such an understanding is needed to help select appropriate methods and improve the long-term impact of rehabilitation programs: memory rehabilitation will fail if neuropsychologists do not deal, first and foremost, with the emotional and metacognitive issues surrounding traumatic brain injury (TBI), rather than focusing on cognitive efficiency.