Search

Abstract Background Breast cancer and genital cancer are known as cancers that affect people’s relationships with their partners. Women with such cancers are emotionally vulnerable and need more support from their partners. The present systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of couple-based interventions on the marital outcomes of patients with these cancers and their intimate partners. Methods To perform this systematic review, Google Scholar and databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, SID (Scientific Information Database), and Magiran were searched systematically. The reviewed studies included randomized controlled trials and quasiexperimental studies in which the intervention group, couple-based interventions, and the control group received routine care, general education or no intervention for cancer treatment. In this study, the included participants were patients with breast cancer or genital cancer and their intimate partners. The primary outcomes considered in this study included patients’ marital adjustment, patients’ marital satisfaction, patients’ marital intimacy, and patients’ marital relationships. The secondary outcomes were partners’ marital adjustment, partners’ marital satisfaction, partners’ marital intimacy, and partners’ marital relationships. A meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager v. 5.3 software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Cochrane Collaboration, 2014; Copenhagen, Denmark). The intervention impacts on continuous outcomes were measured using standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence interval because of the use of various scales to evaluate the outcomes. The quality of evidence presented in the included studies was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. In the subgroup analysis, the studied outcomes were divided into two parts (theory-based and non-theory-based) in terms of the theoretical context of couple-based interventions. Results From a total of 138 retrieved studies, 14 trials were eligible for inclusion in the study. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the patient’s marital satisfaction increased significantly with couple-based interventions (SMD 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.07 to 0.85; 7 trials, 341 patients, very low certainty) compared to the control group, but the evidence was uncertain. However, there were no significant differences between the groups in the partner’s marital satisfaction, the patient’s and partner’s marital adjustment, and the patient’s and partner’s marital intimacy. Additionally, the results of the subgroup analysis showed that the couple-based interventions significantly increased the patient’s marital adjustment (SMD 1.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 3.06; 4 trials, 355 patients, very low certainty), the partner’s marital adjustment (SMD 0.53, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.86; 4 trials, 347 partners, very low certainty), the patient’s marital satisfaction (SMD 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.43; 2 trials, 123 patients, very low certainty), and the partner’s marital satisfaction (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.94; 2 trials, 123 partners, very low certainty) compared to the control group in theory-based studies. In. However, in non-theory-based studies, the results of the meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between the intervention and control groups. Conclusions The results of this study demonstrated the impact of couple-based interventions on the marital outcomes of patients with breast and genital cancers. Because of the very low confidence in the evidence, high-quality randomized trials with a sufficient sample size should be conducted considering the proper theoretical context.

Background: Breast cancer and genital cancer are known as cancers that affect people's relationships with their partners. Women with such cancers are emotionally vulnerable and need more support from their partners. The present systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of couple-based interventions on the marital outcomes of patients with these cancers and their intimate partners. Methods: To perform this systematic review, Google Scholar and databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, SID (Scientific Information Database), and Magiran were searched systematically. The reviewed studies included randomized controlled trials and quasiexperimental studies in which the intervention group, couple-based interventions, and the control group received routine care, general education or no intervention for cancer treatment. In this study, the included participants were patients with breast cancer or genital cancer and their intimate partners. The primary outcomes considered in this study included patients' marital adjustment, patients' marital satisfaction, patients' marital intimacy, and patients' marital relationships. The secondary outcomes were partners' marital adjustment, partners' marital satisfaction, partners' marital intimacy, and partners' marital relationships. A meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager v. 5.3 software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Cochrane Collaboration, 2014; Copenhagen, Denmark). The intervention impacts on continuous outcomes were measured using standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence interval because of the use of various scales to evaluate the outcomes. The quality of evidence presented in the included studies was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. In the subgroup analysis, the studied outcomes were divided into two parts (theory-based and non-theory-based) in terms of the theoretical context of couple-based interventions. Results: From a total of 138 retrieved studies, 14 trials were eligible for inclusion in the study. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the patient's marital satisfaction increased significantly with couple-based interventions (SMD 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.07 to 0.85; 7 trials, 341 patients, very low certainty) compared to the control group, but the evidence was uncertain. However, there were no significant differences between the groups in the partner's marital satisfaction, the patient's and partner's marital adjustment, and the patient's and partner's marital intimacy. Additionally, the results of the subgroup analysis showed that the couple-based interventions significantly increased the patient's marital adjustment (SMD 1.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 3.06; 4 trials, 355 patients, very low certainty), the partner's marital adjustment (SMD 0.53, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.86; 4 trials, 347 partners, very low certainty), the patient's marital satisfaction (SMD 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.43; 2 trials, 123 patients, very low certainty), and the partner's marital satisfaction (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.94; 2 trials, 123 partners, very low certainty) compared to the control group in theory-based studies. In. However, in non-theory-based studies, the results of the meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between the intervention and control groups. Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrated the impact of couple-based interventions on the marital outcomes of patients with breast and genital cancers. Because of the very low confidence in the evidence, high-quality randomized trials with a sufficient sample size should be conducted considering the proper theoretical context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This scoping review aims to provide an accessible summary of available evidence on the efficacy of psychological couple-based interventions among patients with heart disease and their partners focusing on specific aspects and strategies by assessing different emotional and physical cardiac-related outcome measures. Methods: A literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases using the keywords "heart diseases" and "couple-based intervention." A literature search using systematic methods was applied. Data were extracted to address the review aims and were presented as a narrative synthesis. Results: The database search produced 11 studies. Psychological couple-based interventions varied in terms of the type of intervention, personnel, format (group or individual, phone or in person), number of sessions, and duration. Most of the contributions also lacked adequate details on the training of professionals, the contents of the interventions, and the theoretical models on which they were based. Finally, although partners were involved in all the treatment, in most studies, the psychological strategies and outcomes were focused on the patient. Conclusion: The variability of the psychological couple-based interventions of included studies represents a challenge in summarizing the existing literature. Regarding their impact, psychological interventions for patients with cardiovascular disease and their partners were found to moderately improve patients' and partners' outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveThis scoping review aims to provide an accessible summary of available evidence on the efficacy of psychological couple-based interventions among patients with heart disease and their partners focusing on specific aspects and strategies by assessing different emotional and physical cardiac-related outcome measures.MethodsA literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases using the keywords “heart diseases” and “couple-based intervention.” A literature search using systematic methods was applied. Data were extracted to address the review aims and were presented as a narrative synthesis.ResultsThe database search produced 11 studies. Psychological couple-based interventions varied in terms of the type of intervention, personnel, format (group or individual, phone or in person), number of sessions, and duration. Most of the contributions also lacked adequate details on the training of professionals, the contents of the interventions, and the theoretical models on which they were based. Finally, although partners were involved in all the treatment, in most studies, the psychological strategies and outcomes were focused on the patient.ConclusionThe variability of the psychological couple-based interventions of included studies represents a challenge in summarizing the existing literature. Regarding their impact, psychological interventions for patients with cardiovascular disease and their partners were found to moderately improve patients’ and partners’ outcomes.

Relationship strain or dissolution between new parents can affect the co-parenting relationship and parenting engagement. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a relationship-strengthening intervention on parenting behaviors among adolescent couples. Data from a pilot randomized control trial conducted with predominantly Black and Latino couples were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance. Observed intervention * time effects and intervention * time * gender effects were not statistically significant, but had small to moderate effect sizes. Intervention couples demonstrated increased parenting sense of competence compared to control couples. Gender differences in intervention effects were observed for both parenting experiences and parenting engagement. Given the pilot nature of the study, these findings provide preliminary evidence of the effectiveness of this couple-based intervention for improving parenting outcomes. Future research should assess the intervention in a larger sample and leverage technology-based approaches as methods for content delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence on the effect of couple-based interventions on quality of life (QOL) among prostate cancer patients and their spouses. Method: Six English databases and two Chinese databases were systematically searched to identify relevant RCTs that examined the effect of couple-based interventions on QOL. The data from the included studies were extracted by two independent reviewers using a standardized data extraction form. Methodological quality was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analysis was conducted among the suitable studies that the available data were sufficient. Results: One thousand ninety-five studies were identified, and 11 studies met the inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis and 7 studied for meta-analysis. Couple-based interventions involve different formats of physical and psychosocial interventions. Physical exercise-based interventions were popular among couples, and these interventions had the highest level of adherence among all interventions examined herein. However, the meta-analysis of total QOL and physical and mental health revealed a non-significant effect on both prostate cancer patients and their spouses. More RCTs examining couple-based interventions may be needed in developing countries, especially in Asian countries. Conclusion: Couple-based interventions had non-significant effect on improving the total QOL and physical and mental health of prostate cancer patients and their spouses. However, the current evidence is limited because the sample size of the studies is small. Thus, more studies with large sample sizes need to be included to detect the efficacy of couple-based interventions on prostate cancer patients and their spouses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews the efficacy of couple-based, cognitive-behavioral interventions for psychopathology. Over the past two decades, cognitive-behavioral couples therapy has been adapted and systematically integrated with individual cognitive-behavioral therapy for the treatment of a range of individual mental disorders. These integrated approaches are distinct from typical couples therapy and serve as psychotherapy interventions with a primary focus on the disorder, while incorporating partners in the treatment. The article introduces core concepts of couples-based interventions and reviews the findings of clinical trials. Overall, clinical trials of couple-based interventions for depression, substance-use disorders, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and eating disorders show significant symptom improvements that are always at least as large and often larger than that found in individual treatments where a comparison is available. Additionally, couple-based interventions often have significant positive effects on relationship satisfaction as well as interpersonal risk factors for adverse treatment outcomes and relapse such as expressed emotion and symptom accommodation. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to provide a direct comparison with individual cognitive behavioral therapy for several disorders and to pinpoint factors that support clinical decision making to recommend an individual versus couple-based treatment. Finally, clinical recommendations are summarized briefly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Psychotherapeut is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Aim: To describe the characteristics of couple-based intervention studies that address sexuality following cancer. Background: Sexuality-related problems are common among cancer survivors and their partners. Design: Systematic literature review with a narrative summary of results. Data sources: Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL and PsychINFO. We included studies published from 1 January 2009 - 31 December 2016. Additional information was retrieved by scrutinizing reference lists, conducting citation tracking and contacting authors. We included all types of quantitative intervention studies published in the English language which contained outcome measures corresponding to the neo-theoretical framework of sexuality--sexual function, sexual relationship and sexual self-concept. Review Methods: Our review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute reviewer's manual. Data were extracted and appraised using the standardized checklists for quantitative studies. This assessment was conducted independently by two reviewers. A third reviewer was involved if consensus could not be reached. Results: Fourteen studies were included. Interventions were delivered face-to-face, by telephone or via the Internet. Sessions ranged from 1-8, with a duration from 2-22 weeks. Most studies offered ≥3 sessions. Interventions addressed unique concerns and/or provided general education. There was little agreement on the use of outcome measures. Most studies inadequately described fidelity to the study protocol and the training of interventionists. Conclusion: There was no clear consensus about how couple-based interventions are best structured. The results provide tentative evidence for how the quality of future research studies can be improved and how knowledge can be used in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cognitive-behavioral couple therapy (CBCT) is an approach to assisting couples that has strong empirical support for alleviating relationship distress. This paper provides a review of the empirical status of CBCT along with behavioral couple therapy (BCT), as well as the evidence for recent applications of CBCT principles to couple-based interventions for individual psychopathology and medical conditions. Several meta-analyses and major reviews have confirmed the efficacy of BCT and CBCT across trials in the United States, Europe, and Australia, and there is little evidence to support differential effectiveness of various forms of couple therapy derived from behavioral principles. A much smaller number of effectiveness studies have shown that successful implementation in community settings is possible, although effect sizes tend to be somewhat lower than those evidenced in randomized controlled trials. Adapted for individual problems, cognitive-behavioral couple-based interventions appear to be at least as effective as individual cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) across a variety of psychological disorders, and often more effective, especially when partners are substantially involved in treatment. In addition, couple-based interventions tend to have the unique added benefit of improving relationship functioning. Findings on couple-based interventions for medical conditions are more varied and more complex to interpret given the greater range of target outcomes (psychological, relational, and medical variables). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A cancer diagnosis imposes significant emotional distress on a substantial proportion of patients and their partners, posing many challenges for both members of a couple. Facing a breast cancer diagnosis, couples may experience psychosocial distress, which might also affect their individual and dyadic functioning. Coping with cancer from a couple-based perspective as a dyadic stressor can profoundly influence psychosocial adjustment as well as individual and dyadic functioning of patients and spouses. Dyadic coping allows a better matching of needs, sharing of worries, and mutual support, resulting in higher relationship satisfaction. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the issues faced by women diagnosed with breast cancer and their spouses, with particular emphasis on interventions for couples coping with cancer. The effectiveness of couple-based interventions is summarized with a critical discussion. For further research, a better understanding of the challenges couples coping with cancer may face and more insights on how to improve interventions for couples might facilitate improvements in the quality of cancer care. © 2015 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence on the effect of couple-based interventions on quality of life (QOL) among prostate cancer patients and their spouses., Method: Six English databases and two Chinese databases were systematically searched to identify relevant RCTs that examined the effect of couple-based interventions on QOL. The data from the included studies were extracted by two independent reviewers using a standardized data extraction form. Methodological quality was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analysis was conducted among the suitable studies that the available data were sufficient., Results: One thousand ninety-five studies were identified, and 11 studies met the inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis and 7 studied for meta-analysis. Couple-based interventions involve different formats of physical and psychosocial interventions. Physical exercise-based interventions were popular among couples, and these interventions had the highest level of adherence among all interventions examined herein. However, the meta-analysis of total QOL and physical and mental health revealed a non-significant effect on both prostate cancer patients and their spouses. More RCTs examining couple-based interventions may be needed in developing countries, especially in Asian countries., Conclusion: Couple-based interventions had non-significant effect on improving the total QOL and physical and mental health of prostate cancer patients and their spouses. However, the current evidence is limited because the sample size of the studies is small. Thus, more studies with large sample sizes need to be included to detect the efficacy of couple-based interventions on prostate cancer patients and their spouses., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

This article provides a rationale and empirical support for providing couple-based interventions when one partner in a relationship is experiencing individual psychopathology. Several investigations indicate that relationship distress and psychopathology are associated and reciprocally influence each other, such that the existence of relationship distress predicts the development of subsequent psychopathology and vice versa. Furthermore, findings indicate that for several disorders, individual psychotherapy is less effective if the client is in a distressed relationship. Finally, even within happy relationships, partners often inadvertently behave in ways that maintain or exacerbate symptoms for the other individual. Thus, within both satisfied and distressed relationships, including the partner in a couple-based intervention provides an opportunity to use the partner and the relationship as a resource rather than a stressor for an individual experiencing some form of psychological distress. The authors propose that a promising approach to including the partner in treatment involves (a) integrating intervention principles from empirically supported interventions for individual therapy for specific disorders with (b) knowledge of how to employ relationships to promote individual and dyadic change. Based on this logic, the article includes several examples to demonstrate how couple-based interventions can be focused on a specific type of psychopathology, including encouraging empirical findings for these interventions. The article concludes with recommendations for how clinicians and researchers can adapt their knowledge of couple therapy to assist couples in which one partner is experiencing notable psychological distress or diagnosable psychopathology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Partner communication about HIV sexual risk behaviors represents a key area of epidemiologic and social importance in terms of infection acquisition and potential for tailored interventions. Nevertheless, disclosing sexual risk behaviors often presents myriad challenges for marginalized couples who engage in stigmatized behaviors. Using qualitative data from a social epidemiology study of risk for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among female sex workers and their intimate, non-commercial male partners along the Mexico–U.S. border, we examined both partners' perspectives on sex work and the ways in which couples discussed associated HIV/STI risks in their relationship. Our thematic analysis of individual and joint interviews conducted in 2010 and 2011 with 44 couples suggested that broader contexts of social and economic inequalities profoundly shaped partner perspectives of sex work. Although couples accepted sex work as an economic contribution to the relationship in light of limited alternatives and drug addiction, it exacted an emotional toll on both partners. Couples employed multiple strategies to cope with sex work, including psychologically disconnecting from their situation, telling “little lies,” avoiding the topic, and to a lesser extent, superficially discussing their risks. While such strategies served to protect both partners' emotional health by upholding illusions of fidelity and avoiding potential conflict, non-disclosure of risk behaviors may exacerbate the potential for HIV/STI acquisition. Our work has direct implications for designing multi-level, couple-based health interventions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The current paper discusses general principles, therapeutic strategies, common factors, and domains commonly addressed in the treatment of couples who have a partner with a medical condition. Couple-based interventions for medical problems are contrasted with couple therapy and relationship education in that the emphasis is on assisting the patient in addressing the medical disorder, along with being attentive to the patient''s partner and their relationship. Guidelines are provided showing how knowledge and understanding of medical disorders and couple functioning are integrated in order to conduct such interventions. Five common domains addressed during intervention are elaborated upon: (a) psychoeducation about the disorder, (b) sharing thoughts and feeling regarding the disorder, (c) making decisions focal to the medical disorder, (d) implementing relationship changes that are nonmedical but that result from the disorder, and (e) addressing relationship functioning unrelated to the disorder. The importance of empirically demonstrating the utility of each domain in future investigations is noted. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A large body of literature has documented the health promotive effects of healthy committed relationships on the health and wellbeing of heterosexual people in different-sex relationships, including observational and longitudinal studies, couple-based intervention development and evaluation efforts, and articulation of theoretical frameworks. A much smaller but growing field of research has observed that same-sex relationships have similar effects on health outcomes but that these couples face unique stressors that may impact relationship functioning and health. Further, extant theoretical frameworks do not sufficiently address the multiple pathways by which psychosocial vulnerabilities and stressors impact same-sex relationship functioning, engagement in health-related risk behaviors, and the mental and physical health of sexual minorities in relationships. The purpose of this manuscript is to: a) review the existing literature on relationship functioning and health among sexual minorities, including both observational and intervention studies; and b) present an integrated model of relationship functioning and health for same-sex couples that can be used as a basis for further studies on sexual minority dyads, as well as the development of novel couple-based interventions to optimize the health promoting effects of relationships. • Decades of research have documented the health benefits of being in a healthy committed romantic relationship. • Same-sex couples function similarly to different-sex relationships, but they face unique stressors that impact their health. • Extant theoretical models are insufficient for describing the factors that impact relationship functioning and health among same-sex couples. • The Dyadic Health Model describes determinants ofrelationship functioning and health among sexual minorities in relationships. • Couple-based health promotion programs should provide comprehensive relationship education to enhance effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic pain impacts individuals with pain as well as their loved ones. Yet, there has been little attention to the social context in individual psychological treatment approaches to chronic pain management. With this need in mind, we developed a couple-based treatment, "Mindful Living and Relating," aimed at alleviating pain and suffering by promoting couples' psychological and relational flexibility skills. Currently, there is no integrative treatment that fully harnesses the power of the couple, treating both the individual with chronic pain and the spouse as two individuals who are each in need of developing greater psychological and relational flexibility to improve their own and their partners' health. Mindfulness, acceptance, and values-based action exercises were used to promote psychological flexibility. The intervention also targets relational flexibility, which we define as the ability to interact with one's partner, fully attending to the present moment, and responding empathically in a way that serves one's own and one's partner's values. To this end, the intervention also included exercises aimed at applying psychological flexibility skills to social interactions as well as emotional disclosure and empathic responding exercises to enhance relational flexibility. The case presented demonstrates that healthy coping with pain and stress may be most successful and sustainable when one is involved in a supportive relationship with someone who also practices psychological flexibility skills and when both partners use relational flexibility skills during their interactions.