Coping with primary brain tumors together: a scoping review of dyadic psychosocial interventions
A partir d'une revue de la littérature publiée entre 2013 et 2024 (11 articles), cette étude analyse l'intérêt des interventions psychosociales destinées aux dyades patient/aidant pour faire face à une tumeur cérébrale primitive
Purpose: Gliomas are associated with poor prognosis and place significant emotional, psychological, and practical burdens on patients and their care-partners. Dyadic interventions hold promise for mental health, coping, and quality of life. This scoping review synthesizes the current landscape of dyadic interventions in glioma and neuro-oncology care, examining intervention characteristics, theoretical foundations, and psychosocial outcomes, while identifying gaps to guide future research and clinical practice.
Methods: A systematic search (2013–2024) of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, and PsycINFO was conducted for English-language studies. Using the PICOS framework, we included studies involving individuals with brain tumors and their romantic/intimate partners. Eligible studies reported psychosocial, health-related, feasibility, acceptability, or efficacy outcomes for both members of the dyad. Studies were excluded if partners comprised less than 20% of the caregiver sample.
Results: Eleven publications met the inclusion criteria. Interventions included yoga, meditation, psychoeducational and CBT models, dignity therapy, EMDR, and communication coaching. Programs ranged from in-person to online, and from single sessions to multi-week. Across studies, feasibility and acceptability were confirmed, with observed benefits in emotional distress, caregiver mastery, relational connection, and existential well-being. However, many were early-phase and methodologically heterogeneous, with inconsistent reporting of participants’ characteristics, outcome measures and evaluation of mechanisms of change.
Conclusions: Although interest in the application of dyadic approaches to glioma care is increasing, the evidence base remains limited and fragmented. Advancing this field will require more rigorous, theory-driven interventions, including standardized outcome measures and perspectives from patients, partners, and providers to ensure relevance, feasibility, and clinical applicability.
Supportive Care in Cancer , résumé, 2026