Cognitive Decline and Quality of Life among Patients with Breast Cancer undergoing Chemotherapy: The Mediating Effect of Health Promotion Behavior

Jung Ran Lee; Pok Ja Oh

doi:10.7469/kjan.2016.28.2.202

Journal List > Korean J Adult Nurs > v.28(2) > 1076387

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Lee and Oh: Cognitive Decline and Quality of Life among Patients with Breast Cancer undergoing Chemotherapy: The Mediating Effect of Health Promotion Behavior

Original Article

Korean J Adult Nurs 2016;28(2):202-212.

Published online: April 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7469/kjan.2016.28.2.202

Cognitive Decline and Quality of Life among Patients with Breast Cancer undergoing Chemotherapy: The Mediating Effect of Health Promotion Behavior

Jung Ran Lee¹, Pok Ja Oh²

^¹Department of Nursing, Graduate School, Sahmyook University, Seoul

^²Department of Nursing, Sahmyook University, Seoul, Korea

Corresponding author: Oh, Pok Ja Department of Nursing, Sahmyook University, 815 Kongnung-dong, Hwarang-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul 01795, Korea. Tel: +82-2-3399-1589, Fax: +82-2-3399-1594, E-mail: ohpj@syu.ac.kr

Received 17 February 201618 April 2016 Accepted 19 April 2016

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between cognitive function impairment and quality of life (QoL) among patients with breast cancer. Specifically, the intention was to verify the mediating effects for promoting behaviors leading to better health and QoL.

Methods

A purposive sample of 152 patients undergoing chemotherapy was recruited. A cross-sectional survey design was used. Data were collected using four instruments: Everyday Cognition Scale, Korean Mini-Mental State Examination, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Version 4, and Health Promoting Lifestyle Profile.

Results

The mean score for subjective cognitive decline was 65.84; the health promotion behavior was 95.89, and 83.34 for QoL. Health promotion behavior was directly affected by cognitive decline (R²=6.0%) as was QoL (R²=43%). Subjective cognitive decline (β=-.57, p<.001) and health promotion behavior (β=.37, p<.001) were seen as predicting factors in QoL and explained 56% (R²=56%). Health promotion behavior had a partial mediating effect in the relationship between self-reported cognitive decline and QoL (Sobel test: Z=-3.37, p<.001).

Conclusion

Based on the findings of this study, nursing intervention programs focusing on managing cognitive decline and promoting health promotion behavior are highly recommended to improve QoL in cancer patients.

Keywords: Quality of life, Cognitive function, Health promotion, Breast neoplasms

REFERENCES

1.Korean Breast Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts and figures. http://www.kbcs.or.kr.AccessedMarch12013.

2.Brem S., Kumar NB. Management of treatment-related symptoms in patients with breast cancer: Current strategies and future directions. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing. 2011. 15(1):63–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1188/11.CJON.63-71.

3.Calvio L., Peugeot M., Bruns GL., Todd BL., Feuerstein M. Measures of cognitive function and work in occupationally active breast cancer survivors. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2010. 52(2):219–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181d0bef7.

4.Kim KH., Yae CB., Kim GD., Byun HS., Choi EH., Cho EJ. Cognitive function in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Asian Oncology Nursing. 2012. 12:1–11.

5.Rottok J., Ross B. Cognitive rehabilitation. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Press;1994.

6.Wefel JS., Saleeba AK., Buzdar AU., Meyers CA. Acute and late onset cognitive dysfunction associated with chemotherapy in women with breast cancer. Cancer. 2010. 116(14):3348–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25098.

7.Hess LM., Insel KC. Chemotherapy-related change in cognitive function: A conceptual model. Oncology Nursing Forum. 2007. 34(5):981–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1188/07.ONF.981-994.

8.Matsuda T., Takayama T., Tashiro M., Nakamura Y., Ohashi Y., Shimozuma K. Mild cognitive impairment after adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients-evaluation of appropriate research design and methodology to measure symptoms. Breast Cancer. 2005. 12(4):279–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.2325/jbcs.12.279.

9.Min HS., Park SY., Lim JS., Park MO., Won HJ., Kim JI. A study of behaviors for preventing recurrence and quality of life in breast cancer survivors. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2008. 38(2):187–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2008.38.2.187.

10.Walker SN., Sechrist KR., Pender NJ. The health-promoting lifestyle profile: Development and psychometric characteristics. Nursing Research. 1987. 36(2):76–81.

11.Yaffe K., Barnes D., Nevitt M., Lui L-Y., Covinsky K. A prospective study of physical activity and cognitive decline in elderly women who walk. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2001. 161(14):1703–8.

12.Harding M. Health promotion behaviors and psychological distress in cancer survivors. Oncology Nursing Forum. 2012. 39(2):E132–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1188/12.ONF.E132-E140.

13.Oh PJ., Hong YS. A structural model for health promotion and quality of life in people with cancer. Journal of Korean Academy of Adult Nursing. 1996. 8(1):291–308.

14.Farias ST., Mungas D. The measurement of everyday cognition (ECog): Scale development and psychometric properties. Neuropsychology. 2008. 22(4):531–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.22.4.531.

15.Chung BY., Cho EJ. Correlates influencing cognitive impairment in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Asian Oncology Nursing. 2012. 12(3):221–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.5388/aon.2012.12.3.221.

16.Kang Y. A normative study of the Korean-Mini Mental State Examination (K-MMSE) in the elderly. Korean Journal of Psychology. 2006. 25(2):1–12.

17.Prabhu RS., Won M., Shaw EG., Hu C., Brachman DG., Buckner JC, et al. Effect of the addition of chemotherapy to radiotherapy on cognitive function in patients with low-grade glioma: Secondary analysis of RTOG 98-02. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2014. 32(6):535–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.53.1830.

18.Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy. http://www.facit.org/. Accessed November 22. 2013.

19.Kim HJ., So HS. A study on health promoting behavior in postmastectomy patients. Journal of Korean Academy of Adult Nursing. 2001. 13(1):82–95.

20.Park JG., Park CI., Kim NK. Oncology. Seoul: Ilchokak publishing;2003.

21.Baron RM., Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986. 51(6):1173–82.

22.Lee IH. Easyflow regression analysis. 1st ed. Seoul: Hannarae publishing;2014.

23.Kim GD., Chung BY., Kim KH., Byun HS., Choi EH. Comparison of climacteric symptoms and cognitive impairment in breast cancer survivors and healthy women. Asian Oncology Nursing. 2013. 13:11–7.

24.Cimprich B., So H., Roni DL., Trask C. Pre-treatment factors related to cognitive functioning in women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. Psycho-Oncology. 2005. 14(1):70–8.

25.Ahles TA., Saykin AJ. Breast cancer chemotherapy-related cognitive dysfunction. Clinical Breast Cancer. 2002. 3(Suppl 3):84–90.

26.Kim JM., Yoon JS., Lee HY. Comparison of diagnostic validities between MMSE-K and K-MMSE for screening of dementia. Journal of Korean Neuropsychiatric Association. 2003. 42(1):124–30.

27.Bender CM., Sereika SM., Berga SL., Vogel VG., Brufsky AM., Paraska KK, et al. Cognitive impairment associated with adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. Psycho-Oncology. 2006. 15(5):422–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.964.

28.Jeong KS., Heo JU., Tae YS. Relationships among distress, family support, and health promotion behavior in breast cancer survivors. Asian Oncology Nursing. 2014. 14(3):146–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.5388/aon.2014.14.3.146.

29.Kwon EJ., Yi MS. Distress and quality of life in breast cancer survivors in Korea. Asian Oncology Nursing. 2012. 12(4):289–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.5388/aon.2012.12.4.289.

30.Park JH., Bae SH., Jung YM. Changes of symptom distress and quality of life in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant therapy. Asian Oncology Nursing. 2015. 15(2):67–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.5388/aon.2015.15.2.67.

Figure 1.

Mediating effect of health promotion behavior between perceived cognitive decline and quality of life.

Table 1.

Cognitive Function, Health Promotion Behavior and Quality of Life according to General Characteristics of the Subject (N=152)

Variables	Categories	n (%)	Perceived cognitive decline		Objective cognitive function		Health promotion behavior		Quality of life
Variables	Categories	n (%)	M±SD t	t or F (p) Scheffé	M±SD	t or F (p) Scheffé	M±SD	t or F (p) Scheffé	M±SD	t or F (p) Scheffé
Age (year)	＜40^a ^b	23 (15.1)	60.96±16.52	1.06	29.04±1.36	15.01	94.04±18.23	3.07	90.04±18.79	3.41
	40~49^b ^c	56 (36.8)	63.59±24.03	(.367)	28.84±1.06	(＜.001)	98.84±17.38	(.030)	87.98±23.05	(.019)
	50~59^c	59 (38.8)	68.39±23.77		28.37±1.34	a, b, c＞d	96.68±16.30	b＞d	79.10±21.76
	≥60^d	14 (9.2)	71.14±30.05		26.29±2.23		83.79±16.00		71.64±29.01
Martial status	Yes	135 (88.8)	65.98±24.01	-0.20	28.41±1.55	1.06	96.27±17.28	-0.77	83.06±23.53	0.42
Martial status	No	17 (11.2)	64.76±20.56	(.842)	28.82±1.38	(.292)	92.82±17.93	(.441)	85.59±19.86	(.672)
Education	≤MS^a	29 (19.1)	65.52±24.47	0.01	27.41±2.13	12.46	93.21±20.20	3.15	77.90±25.83	1.63
	HS^b ^c	70 (46.1)	65.71±25.73	(.991)	28.43±1.29	(＜.001)	93.40±17.48	(.046)	82.60±23.19	(.199)
	≥College^c	53 (34.9)	66.19±20.38		29.06±1.08	a＜b, c 1	100.64±14.54		87.30±21.07
Monthly income (10,000 won)	＜200^a ^b	46 (30.3)	74.11±26.44	3.05	28.44±1.60	0.55	90.48±16.43	3.35	74.13±22.20	4.93
	200~399^b ^c	71 (46.7)	63.56±23.22	(.031)	28.45±1.63	(.652)	97.90±17.65	(.021)	86.11±22.59	(.003)
	400~599^c ^d	20 (13.2)	60.25±16.21		28.20±1.32		94.45±14.96	a＜d	84.35±19.37	a＜b, d
	≥600^d	15 (9.9)	58.73±18.86		28.87±1.06	1	104.87±17.40		97.13±24.28
Family support	Satisfied^a	97 (63.8)	62.03±21.10	3.66	28.53±1.45	0.65	98.99±17.92	4.74	87.46±23.29	5.14
	Moderate^b	47 (30.9)	72.91±26.94	(.028)	28.26±1.78	(.524)	91.06±15.07	(.010)	77.49±21.39	(.007)
	Unsatisfied	8 (5.3)	70.50±23.90	a＜b	28.75±0.71		86.63±13.79	a＞b	67.75±18.01	a＞b
Age of menarche	＜13^a ^b	38 (25.0)	63.39±20.10	0.27	28.84±1.35	3.73 1	101.03±16.38	2.30	89.11±25.70	2.16
	14~15^b ^c	68 (44.7)	66.68±22.96	(.764)	28.56±1.52	(.026)	94.51±14.03	(.104)	83.29±22.68	(.119)
	＞15^c	46 (30.3)	66.63±27.28		27.98±1.60	a＞c	93.67±21.52		78.65±20.77
Menopause	No^a ^b	39 (25.7)	61.44±20.35	1.84	29.00±1.24	10.25	98.69±16.65	2.03	90.41±23.60	5.21
	Yes^b ^c†	59 (38.8)	70.22±27.48	(.162)	27.80±1.85	(＜.001)	92.39±17.59	(.135)	76.27±24.96	(.006)
	Yes^c†	54 (35.5)	64.24±20.61		28.78±1.02	a, c＞b	97.69±17.18		85.96±18.44	a＞b
ECOG PS	0^a ^b	25 (16.4)	51.16±12.97	5.20	28.48±1.29	0.09 1	105.20±21.64	4.07	100.28±19.32	9.47
	1^b ^c	85 (55.9)	64.88±21.12	(.001)	28.42±1.60	(.986)	96.41±16.52	(.004)	84.98±20.37	(＜.001)
	2^c ^d	25 (16.4)	75.44±26.82	a＜c, d	28.60±1.22		92.12±10.49	a＞d	74.72±23.69	a＞b, c, d
	3^d	15 (9.9)	78.13±32.57		28.33±2.09		84.93±16.90		64.13±21.71	b＞d
	4	2 (1.3)	79.50±3.54		28.50±0.71		86.50±3.54		54.00±14.14
Comorbidity	Yes	44 (28.9)	64.82±27.96	0.34	28.50±1.65	0.58	96.58±17.46	0.77	84.51±22.42	0.98
Comorbidity	No	108 (71.1)	66.26±21.70	(.734)	28.34±1.20	(.563)	94.18±17.07	(.440)	80.48±24.74	(.331)
Stage	I	29 (19.1)	63.79±20.68	0.22	28.24±1.85	0.97	96.59±18.76	0.49	85.07±20.91	0.49
	II	77 (50.7)	65.75±21.85	(.885)	28.65±1.14	(.408)	96.99±15.79	(.689)	84.48±22.84	(.687)
	III	36 (23.7)	66.33±26.46		28.33±1.97		94.39±20.39		81.44±24.31
	IV	10 (6.6)	70.70±34.87		28.00±1.33		90.80±13.07		76.40±28.28
Metastasis	Yes	46 (36.5)	70.58±26.92	-2.35	28.50±1.68	-0.35	94.67±19.63	0.81	82.08±24.89	0.64
Metastasis	No	80 (63.5)	61.58±19.33	(.020)	28.41±1.39	(.726)	96.99±14.99	(.418)	84.48±21.47	(.526)
Total chemotherap cycles	≤6^a ^b	82 (53.9)	61.85±20.56	3.34	28.55±1.39	0.53	97.88±16.61	1.21	85.88±22.65	1.16
	py 7~12^b	51 (33.6)	72.55±24.96	(.038)	28.41±1.71	(.590)	93.88±17.92	(.301)	79.67±21.19	(.315)
	≥13	19 (12.5)	65.05±28.92	a＜b	28.16±1.64		92.68±18.56		82.26±29.20
Hormone therapy	Yes	107 (70.9)	64.28±22.96	-1.34	28.46±1.51	0.01	96.93±16.66	1.52	84.06±22.92	0.67
Hormone therapy	No	44 (29.1)	69.93±25.08	(.183)	28.46±1.62	(.990)	92.34±17.58	(.132)	81.30±23.85	(.507)

MS=Middle school; HS=High school;

^† Related to cancer treatment

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics of Perceived Cognitive Decline, Objective Cognitive Function, Health Promotion Behavior and Quality of Life (N=152)

Variable	n (%)	Possible range	Actual range	M±SD	Mean of item±SD
Objective cognitive function		0~30	22~30	28.45±1.53
≤23 score 24~26 score	2 (1.3) 13 (8.6)
24~26 score	13 (8.6)
≥27 score	137 (90.1)
Perceived cognitive decline		0~156	35~146	65.84±23.56	1.69±0.60
Daily memory		0~32	5~32	15.22±6.06	1.90±0.76
Language		0~36	6~36	14.38±5.86	1.60±0.65
Executive function: Planning		0~20	1~20	7.70±3.36	1.54±0.67
Executive function: Organization		0~24	5~24	9.87±4.22	1.64±0.70
Executive function: Divided attention		0~16	3~16	7.41±3.53	1.85±0.88
Visuospatial abilities		0~28	4~28	11.27±5.01	1.61±0.72
Health promotion behavior		0~152	51~144	95.89±17.33	2.52±0.46
Self-actualization		0~40	10~40	24.70±6.70	2.47±0.67
Health responsibility		0~32	10~32	20.91±4.31	2.61±0.54
Exercise		0~12	3~12	6.71±2.12	2.24±0.71
Nutrition		0~24	8~24	16.56±3.38	2.76±0.56
Interpersonal support		0~16	5~16	10.51±2.50	2.63±0.62
Stress management		0~28	7~28	16.49±4.03	2.36±0.58
Quality of life		0~148	21~133	83.34±23.10	2.25±0.63
Physical well being		0~28	0~28	17.91±7.27	2.56±1.04
Social/family well being		0~28	0~28	15.09±6.74	2.16±0.96
Emotional well being		0~24	0~24	15.28±5.13	2.55±0.85
Functional well being		0~28	0~28	14.24±6.74	2.03±0.96
Additional concerns		0~40	2~37	20.82±7.14	2.08±0.71

Table 3.

Mediating Effect of Health Promotion Behavior between Perceived Cognitive Decline and Quality of Life (N=152)

Variables	B	β	t	p	Adj. R²	F	p
Step 1. Perceived cognitive decline → HPB	-.19	-.25	-3.22	.002	.06	10.35	.002
Step 2. Perceived cognitive decline → QoL	-.65	-.66	-10.75	＜.001	.43	115.60	＜.001
Step 3. Perceived cognitive decline, HPB → QoL					.56	95.40	＜.001
1) Perceived cognitive decline → QoL	-.56	-.57	-10.10	＜.001
2) HPB → QoL	.49	.37	6.55	＜.001
Sobel test: Z=-3.37, p＜.001

HPB=health promotion behavior; QoL=quality of life.

TOOLS

Similar articles