Communication About Prostate Cancer Between Men and Their Wives

,

Original Research

Communication About Prostate Cancer Between Men and Their Wives

J Fam Pract. 2001 March;50(3):226-231

References

1. Garnick M.B. Prostate cancer: screening, diagnosis, and management. Ann Intern Med 1993;118:804-18.Published erratum appears in Ann Intern Med 1994; 120:698.

2. Clark JA, Wray N, Brody B, Ashton C, Giesler B, Watkins H. Dimensions of quality of life expressed by men treated for metastatic prostate cancer. Soc Sci Med 1997;45:1299-309.

3. Lavery J, Clarke V. Prostate cancer: patients’ and spouses’ coping and marital adjustment. Psychol Health Med 1999;4:289-302.

4. Arai Y, Kawakita M, Hida S, Terachi T, Okada Y, Yoshida O. Psychosocial aspects in long-term survivors of testicular cancer. J Urol 1996;155:574-78.

5. Booth A, Johnson DR. Declining health and marital quality. J Fam Marriage 1994;56:218-23.

6. Kuyper MB, Wester F. In the shadow: the impact of chronic illness on the patient’s partner. Qualitative Health Res 1998;8:237-53.

7. Suls J, Green P, Rose G, Lounsbury P, Gordon E. Hiding worries from one’s spouse: associations between coping via protective buffering and distress in male post-myocardial infarction patients and their wives. J Behav Med 1997;20:333-49.

8. Hilton BA. Family communication patterns in coping with early breast cancer. West J Nurs Res 1994;16:366-88 discussion 388-91.

9. Kilpatrick MG, Kristjanson LJ, Tataryn DJ, Fraser VH. Information needs of husbands of women with breast cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 1998;25:1595-601.

10. Hilton BA. A study of couple communication patterns when coping with early stage breast cancer. Can Oncol Nurs J 1993;3:159-66.

11. Kornblith AB, Zlotolow IM, Gooen J, et al. Quality of life of patients with prostate cancer and their spouses. Cancer 1994;73:2791-802.

12. O’Rourke ME. Narrowing the options: the process of deciding on prostate cancer treatment. Cancer Invest 1999;17:349-59.

13. Volk RJ, Cantor SB, Spann SJ, Cass AR, Cardenas MP, Warren MM. P of husbands and wives for prostate cancer screening. Arch Fam Med 1997;6:72-76.

14. Cassileth BR, Soloway MS, Vogelzang NJ, et al. Quality of life and psychosocial status in stage D prostate cancer: Zoladex Prostate Cancer Study Group. Qual Life Res 1992;1:323-29.

15. Cassileth BR, Soloway MS, Vogelzang NJ, et al. Patients’ choice of treatment in stage D prostate cancer. Urology 1989;33:57-62.

16. O’Rourke ME, Germino BB. Prostate cancer treatment decisions: a focus group exploration. Oncol Nurs Forum 1998;25:97-104.

17. Ptacek J, et al. Stress and coping processes in men with prostate cancer: the divergent views of husbands and wives. J Soc Clin Psychol 1999;18:299-324.

18. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage; 1990.

19. Northouse LL, Templin T, Mood D, Oberst M. Couples’ adjustment to breast cancer and benign breast disease: a longitudinal analysis. Psycho-Oncol 1998;7:37-48.

20. Baider L, et al. Mutuality of fate: adaptation and psychological distress in cancer patients and their partners. In: Baider L, Cooper CL, De-Nour AK, eds. Cancer and the family. New York, NY: John Wiley; 1996;173-86.

21. Litwin MS. Health-related quality of life in men with erectile dysfunction. J Gen Intern Med 1998;13:159-66.

Lack of Communication

The data give no indication that men deal with cancer by discussing fears of death and dependency with their wives. Instead they express a desire to put the cancer behind them, “to be done with the disease.” The men presented themselves as having adjusted to the disease with a self-identity that is unchanged by prostate cancer. Their lack of communication about emotions received little challenge from their wives. Moreover, the wives collaborated in that they hid their own fears and despair instead of pursuing spousal communication about emotions. Thus, protective buffering is the prevalent coping style by both spouses, confirming the findings of earlier research that spouses’ coping styles and emotions are interrelated.^7,19,20

This is problematic for 2 reasons. Earlier research indicates that there is an inverse relationship between protective buffering and marital satisfaction, as well as a strong positive association between protective buffering and patient and spouse distress.⁷ The couples with metastatic prostate cancer claim that there is little change in their mates. They overwhelmingly portray themselves as happy and content with their marital relationship. Contrary to this depiction, references to moodiness and the emergence of jealousy point to strains on the marital relationship. Also, lack of communication leads to uncertainty about their spouse’s feelings and thoughts, another potential strain on the marital relationship. Although our study does not entail an assessment of men’s and wives individual or joint adjustment to prostate cancer, we certainly find evidence of the risk factors for poor adjustment which previous studies indicate: lack of communicating and protective buffering. Also, losing or abandoning one’s sex life, as in our sample, is a significant change that most likely has a strong association with psychological well-being, as found in earlier studies.²¹ This appears to suggest that the couples with metastatic prostate cancer may be at risk for distress and poor adjustment.

Conclusions

These insights into couples’ coping styles are of special relevance to physicians who care for men with prostate cancer. Generally, physicians are open to married men involving their wives in the management of prostate cancer. However, our findings raise questions about how involved wives really are. Although women are interested in their husbands’ prostate cancer, the lack of communication within the couple suggests that their active involvement may be less than is commonly assumed. Care providers may positively influence patients’ adaptation and quality of life by facilitating involvement by the patient’s wife, rather than assume that her presence alone signals active involvement. Also, physicians can suspect that patients who choose to go through treatment by themselves may be at risk for poor adjustment to their diagnosis.

Related Resources

National Prostate Cancer Coalition http://www.4npcc.org/Advocates.htm/
US TOO, International http://www.ustoo.com/
Online Decision Support for Prostate Cancer http://www.cancerfacts.com/

· Acknowledgments ·

Support for our research was provided by US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, Fort Detrick, Maryland, grant number DAMD17-99-1-9052, Principle Investigator, Dr Boehmer. The data collection was supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Service grant SDR-93-007.