evidence and practice
Enhancing well-being and resilience in people living with cancer. Part 1
Sara Booth Emeritus consultant and honorary associate lecturer, Department of Palliative Care, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, England
Richella Ryan Lecturer in palliative medicine, University of Cambridge, England
Angela Clow Professor of psycho-neuroendocrinology, University of Westminster, London, England
Nina Smyth Senior lecturer in psychology, University of Westminster, London, England
Susan Sharpe Senior clinical nurse specialist in palliative care, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, England
Anna Spathis Consultant in palliative medicine, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, England
Receiving a new diagnosis of cancer or recurrent disease is distressing. Increasing numbers of people are living with cancer, as well as those who have been cured. Living with cancer and the possibility of recurrence requires psychological strength to deal with the treatment, effects of the illness and uncertainty about the future. Self-efficacy and psychological well-being can reduce the effects of chronic stress.
Excellent symptom control is essential and fatigue, the most prevalent symptom for those with cancer, requires targeted support. Well-being and psychological resilience may be improved by specific actions and psychological approaches, some of which are encompassed by the ‘five ways to well-being’ framework, which can be used to deliver personalised care.
The first of this two-part article reviews interventions that promote well-being and resilience in patients living with cancer. Part two describes the ‘five ways to well-being’ framework and suggests practical ways in which clinicians can integrate this and other interventions into clinical practice.
Cancer Nursing Practice. doi: 10.7748/cnp.2018.e1484Citation
Booth S, Ryan R, Clow A et al (2018) Enhancing well-being and resilience in people living with cancer. Part 1. Cancer Nursing Practice. doi: 10.7748/cnp.2018.e1484Peer review
This article has been subject to external double-blind peer review and has been checked for plagiarism using automated softwareCorrespondence
Published online: 09 October 2018
Want to read more?
Subscribe for unlimited access
Try 1 month’s access for just £1 and get:
- Full access to the website and the online archive
- Bi-monthly digital edition
- RCNi Portfolio and interactive CPD quizzes
- RCNi Learning with 200+ evidence-based modules
- 10 articles a month from any other RCNi journal
Already subscribed? Log in
Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now