Face-to-face vs. online peer support groups for prostate cancer: A cross-sectional comparison study
Face-to-face vs. online peer support groups for prostate cancer: A cross-sectional comparison study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11764-017-0633-0
复制
发表时间：
2018-02-01
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Ihrig, Andreas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Huber, Johannes;Muck, Tanja;Ihrig, Andreas
随着社交媒体的快速发展，在线支持小组(OSG)对患者来说变得越来越重要。因此，我们的研究目的是比较传统面对面支持小组和OSG的用户。我们对所有地区的面对面支持小组和德国最大的OSG进行了横断面比较研究。通过使用有效的工具，调查涵盖了社会人口学和疾病相关信息、决策习惯、心理方面和生活质量。我们分析了955名患者访问面对面支持小组和686名患者使用OSG的完整数据。使用OSG的患者年轻6岁(65.3vs.71.5岁；P<；0.001)，受教育程度更高(47vs.21%；p<；0.001)，收入更高。使用口服避孕药的患者报告的转移性疾病比例较高(17%vs.12%；p<；0.001)。使用OSG的患者报告了更大的痛苦。在焦虑、抑郁和总体生活质量方面没有显著差异。在面对面的支持小组中，患者评分在交换信息、获得认可和关心他人方面更好。使用OSG的患者要求在治疗决策过程中扮演更积极的角色(58%比33%；p<；0.001)，并更频繁地改变他们最初的治疗决定(29vs.25%；p<；0.001)。这两种同伴支持方式都得到了用户的非常积极的评价，并对治疗决策产生了显著影响。老年患者可能会从面对面支持小组中持续的社会支持中受益更多。OSG为更年轻、受过更好教育的高度痛苦患者提供低门槛的急性问题建议。
As social media are evolving rapidly online support groups (OSG) are becoming increasingly important for patients. Therefore, the aim of our study was to compare the users of traditional face-to-face support groups and OSG.We performed a cross-sectional comparison study of all regional face-to-face support groups and the largest OSG in Germany. By applying validated instruments, the survey covered sociodemographic and disease-related information, decision-making habits, psychological aspects, and quality of life.We analyzed the complete data of 955 patients visiting face-to-face support groups and 686 patients using OSG. Patients using OSG were 6 years younger (65.3 vs. 71.5 years; p < 0.001), had higher education levels (47 vs. 21%; p < 0.001), and had higher income. Patients using OSG reported a higher share of metastatic disease (17 vs. 12%; p < 0.001). Patients using OSG reported greater distress. There were no significant differences in anxiety, depression, and global quality of life. In the face-to-face support groups, patient ratings were better for exchanging information, gaining recognition, and caring for others. Patients using OSG demanded a more active role in the treatment decision-making process (58 vs. 33%; p < 0.001) and changed their initial treatment decision more frequently (29 vs. 25%; p < 0.001).Both modalities of peer support received very positive ratings by their users and have significant impact on treatment decision-making.Older patients might benefit more from the continuous social support in face-to-face support groups. OSG offer low-threshold advice for acute problems to younger and better educated patients with high distress.