Research article

Coping strategies and social support among caregivers of patients with cancer: a cross-sectional study in Vietnam

  • Received: 12 October 2020 Accepted: 08 December 2020 Published: 11 December 2020
  • Research on coping strategies and social support among Vietnamese cancer caregivers remains limited. In this study, we aim to examine the relationships between types of coping strategies utilized and social support among cancer caregivers. This was a cross-sectional study conducted in three main cancer hospitals in the Northern, Central and Southern regions of Vietnam. The 28-item Brief COPE Inventory (BCI) Scale and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were utilized. Descriptive statistics and multivariate linear regression were performed. Active coping, acceptance and positive reframing were the most used coping strategies among participants, while substance use was the least commonly used. Level of social support was positively correlated with the utilization of coping mechanisms. Receiving high social support and utilizing positive coping strategies enables caregivers to mitigate their caregiving burden, control the situation and enhance their own quality of life.

    Citation: Nguyen Xuan Long, Nguyen Bao Ngoc, Tran Thi Phung, Dao Thi Dieu Linh, Ta Nhat Anh, Nguyen Viet Hung, Nguyen Thi Thang, Nguyen Thi Mai Lan, Vu Thu Trang, Nguyen Hiep Thuong, Nguyen Van Hieu, Hoang Van Minh. Coping strategies and social support among caregivers of patients with cancer: a cross-sectional study in Vietnam[J]. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(1): 1-14. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021001

    Related Papers:

    [1] Anna Kavga, Ioannis Kalemikerakis, Theocharis Konstantinidis, Ioanna Tsatsou, Petros Galanis, Eugenia Karathanasi, Ourania Govina . Factors associated with social support for family members who care for stroke survivors. AIMS Public Health, 2022, 9(1): 142-154. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2022011
    [2] Alexandria Nyembwe, Yihong Zhao, Billy A. Caceres, Kelli Hall, Laura Prescott, Stephanie Potts-Thompson, Morgan T. Morrison, Cindy Crusto, Jacquelyn Y. Taylor . Moderating effect of coping strategies on the association between perceived discrimination and blood pressure outcomes among young Black mothers in the InterGEN study. AIMS Public Health, 2025, 12(1): 217-232. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2025014
    [3] Anastasia Stathopoulou, Georgios F. Fragkiadakis . Assessment of psychological distress and quality of life of family caregivers caring for patients with chronic diseases at home. AIMS Public Health, 2023, 10(2): 456-468. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023032
    [4] Omar Shamieh, Waleed Alrjoub, Ghadeer Alarjeh, Khawlah Ammar, Mohammad Abu Hazim, Tayseer Shawash, Osama Zamel, Maysa Al-Hussaini, Majeda Al-Ruzzieh, Hikmat Abdel-Razeq, Asem Mansour . Prevalence and predictors of staff burnout at a tertiary cancer center in Jordan. AIMS Public Health, 2025, 12(2): 470-490. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2025026
    [5] Sphiwe Madiba, Ntaoleng Mohlabane . Attendance of psychosocial teen clubs and self-reported antiretroviral medication adherence: a cross section study of adolescents with perinatal HIV in the Kingdom of Lesotho. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(3): 541-552. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021044
    [6] Elizabeth Chan, Elizabeth Procter-Gray, Linda Churchill, Jie Cheng, Rachel Siden, Annabella Aguirre, Wenjun Li . Associations among living alone, social support and social activity in older adults. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(3): 521-534. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020042
    [7] Laura Gonzalo-Ciria, Marta Pérez De Heredia-Torres, María Isabel Vidal-Sánchez, María José López-de-la-Fuente, Elisa Bullón-Benito, Ana Poveda-García, Mariana Ortiz-Piña, María Cristina Ruiz-Garrós, Ana Gascón-Catalán . Loss of productivity among caregivers of dependent family members. AIMS Public Health, 2025, 12(2): 451-469. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2025025
    [8] Nguyen Thanh Ha, Do Thi Hanh Trang, Le Thi Thu Ha . Is obesity associated with decreased health-related quality of life in school-age children?—Results from a survey in Vietnam. AIMS Public Health, 2018, 5(4): 338-351. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2018.4.338
    [9] Ilenia Piras, Vanessa Usai, Paolo Contu, Maura Galletta . Vicarious trauma, coping strategies and nurses' health outcomes: An exploratory study. AIMS Public Health, 2024, 11(4): 1071-1081. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2024055
    [10] Francesco Marcatto, Donatella Ferrante, Mateusz Paliga, Edanur Kanbur, Nicola Magnavita . Behavioral dysregulation at work: A moderated mediation analysis of sleep impairment, work-related stress, and substance use. AIMS Public Health, 2025, 12(2): 290-309. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2025018
  • Research on coping strategies and social support among Vietnamese cancer caregivers remains limited. In this study, we aim to examine the relationships between types of coping strategies utilized and social support among cancer caregivers. This was a cross-sectional study conducted in three main cancer hospitals in the Northern, Central and Southern regions of Vietnam. The 28-item Brief COPE Inventory (BCI) Scale and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were utilized. Descriptive statistics and multivariate linear regression were performed. Active coping, acceptance and positive reframing were the most used coping strategies among participants, while substance use was the least commonly used. Level of social support was positively correlated with the utilization of coping mechanisms. Receiving high social support and utilizing positive coping strategies enables caregivers to mitigate their caregiving burden, control the situation and enhance their own quality of life.



    In recent years, the global burden of cancer has rapidly increased. Cancer is currently the second leading cause of death in the world, following only cardiovascular diseases [1]. Since cancer is a chronic disease, patients as well as their caregivers are forced to confront the long journey of cancer treatment and care, which may lead to various psychological and mental health issues [2][4]. Previous scientific evidence indicates that caregivers of patients diagnosed with cancer suffer from high levels of negative emotions and psychological distress including depression and anxiety [5][9]. A study by Geng and colleagues demonstrated that anxiety and depression are present in 46.5% and 42.3% of cancer caregivers respectively [5]. Further, Perez et al. found the rate of anxiety among these caregivers can reach as high as 76% [10]. It is conventional for cancer caregivers to use several coping strategies which may reduce and even eliminate the adverse impacts of anxiety-and-depression-creating problems; conversely, some coping strategies can also exacerbate these same issues [11].

    By definition, “coping” refers to different ways or styles in which an individual may respond, behave and perform to deal with psychological distress or mental challenges [12],[13]. The coping process involves constant adaptations of people in their own circumstances [12],[14]. Previous findings show that caregivers of cancer patients in different context employ various coping strategies to confront the stressful events they encounter [15][21]. Among those coping styles, people seem to prefer problem-focused coping to emotion-focused coping [22]. Their ways of coping play a pivotal role in determining the influence of the stressor on their mental health status, when considering it in the context of culture, society and environment [23]. In addition, applying appropriate and effective coping strategies enables cancer caregivers to mitigate their caregiving burden, reduce psychological pressure and thereby improve their quality of life [11],[24],[25].

    There have been various ways to define social support, which is often recommended to be vital to enhancing mental health [26]. According to Roohafza et al., “social support refers to the experience of being valued, respected, cared about, and loved by others who are present in one's life” [27]. It can be derived from distinct sources, such as friends, relatives, spouses, or the community. Social support may help to bolster individuals' self-esteem or provide them with assistance in relieving stress [28].

    A literature review indicated a correlation between social support and coping strategies. Roohafza and colleagues found that perceived friend support has a significant positive correlation with an active coping style but a significant negative correlation with avoidant coping style [27]. It has also been found that social support can increase proactive coping [27],[29],[30]. Some previous studies suggest that “the relationship between styles of coping and social support should be considered as reciprocal rather than causal” [31],[32]. A study among family caregivers of patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer in China revealed significant associations between social support and emotion-focused coping, adaptive coping, and maladaptive coping styles [33].

    Vietnam is a lower-middle-income country located in Southeast Asia. In 2018, Vietnam had an age-standardized cancer incidence rate of 151.4 per 100,000 people, corresponding to 164,671 new cancer cases [34]. In Vietnam, ways of coping and the utilization of social support may be influenced by cultural norms, interpersonal relationships, and family responsibilities. Examining ways of coping among cancer caregivers can help to strengthen positive coping strategies and reduce negative coping strategies. However, in Vietnam, research on caregivers of patients with cancer, especially about their coping styles with mental health challenges remains limited. There were only two studies by Nguyen Thi Thanh Mai and her colleagues in 2012 and 2013 on how parents of children with cancer cope with caregiver burden found parents have different ways of coping with negative emotions in throughout their children's different cancer stages, and also suggested the need to have psychosocial support for parents of children with cancer [35],[36]. Furthermore, to the best of our knowledge, none of the previous research in Vietnam considers the association between social support and coping strategies among caregivers of patients with cancer. Accordingly, in this study, we aim to identify the coping strategies utilized by the caregivers of Vietnamese cancer patients in controlling their psychological distress and evaluate the relationship between the coping strategies and social support among the Vietnamese caregivers. The evidence gained from this study is a crucial foundation for the development of appropriate interventions to support these people in the future.

    This research was conducted using a cross-sectional design.

    The participants of this study were the caregivers of Vietnamese cancer patients, responsible for attending to the needs of cancer patients. They were family members or distant relatives, providing unpaid, nonprofessional care and met the following criteria: (a) a primary care provider of a cancer patient who was diagnosed by a clinicianp; (b) ≥18 years old; and (c) able to participate in the study both physically and mentally.

    The study was conducted in three cancer hospitals located in three major cities in Vietnam: Vietnam National Cancer Hospital (located in Tan Trieu, Hanoi), Da Nang Oncology Hospital (Da Nang city) and Ho Chi Minh Oncology Hospital (Ho Chi Minh city). These such hospitals are the main cancer care centers in the Northern, Central and Southern regions of Vietnam, respectively. In each hospital, three departments were selected as research sites, namely the Departments of Radiation Oncology, Abdominal Surgery, and Neurological Surgery.

    All caregivers of patients diagnosed with cancer who were treated at one of the three afore-mentioned departments from October 10th to October 25th, 2019 and met the inclusion criteria were invited to this study. 789 caregivers of cancer patients were invited to participate in the survey.

    Coping strategies among the caregivers of cancer patients were measured using the 28-item Brief COPE Inventory (BCI) [37]. The scale comprises of 14 domains (two items per domain) and is divided into three groups of coping: problem-focused coping (planning, active coping and use of instrumental support); emotion-focused coping (acceptance, positive reframing, use of emotional support, humor, religion) and dysfunctional coping (venting, denial, self-blame, self-distraction, substance use, behavioral disengagement) [37].

    Participants were asked to rate each item on a 4-point Likert scale with 1 = “I haven't been doing this at all” and 4 = “I've been doing this a lot”. The BCI is a validated and frequently used tool for determining the ways people confront a problem [38],[39].

    The socioeconomic and demographic information collected from the caregivers included: sex (male/female), age (<45 years old/≥45 years old), education, occupation, relationship to the patient (spouse/child/others), type of support given to the patient, financial difficulty (yes/no), location (Ha Noi, Da Nang, Ho Chi Minh) and social support.

    Level of education was grouped as (a) incomplete secondary school (did not complete the ninth grade or lower); (b) secondary school or higher (completion of the ninth grade or higher).

    Occupational status of the caregivers was defined by two groups: (a) unemployed (person who is retired, studying or does not have any paying job); (b) employed (currently working and receiving income for the work).

    Support to the patients was grouped into three categories: (a) primarily provide for both finance and care; (b) primarily provide for either finance or care; and (c) other (partially provide finance, care and/or different support).

    Social support was identified using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) [40]. This questionnaire consists of 12 items to determine the different kinds of support from friends, family, and significant others. Each question can be responded to through a rating scale, ranging from 1 (very strongly disagree) to 7 (very strongly agree). Total MSPSS scores ranged from 12 to 84 and were classified into three groups: low support (12–47), moderate support (48–68), and high support (69–84) [33].

    The MSPSS and Brief COPE questionnaire were translated into Vietnamese by a local professional translator, then another independent linguistic expert provided back-translation from those instruments into English. Finally, a third qualified translator compared both English versions to ensure uniformity of meaning.

    Data was collected via individual interviews with three interviewers in each hospital. The interviewers received an eight-hour training session to assure the quality and consistency of the data collected. Using the eligibility screening, the interviewers approached caretakers from each of the study sites during the study period to explain the aims of the study, request participation, and obtain informed consent. The interviewers also informed the participants that their participation was entirely voluntary, and they have the right to withdraw at any time.

    Both descriptive and analytical statistics were performed using Stata 14 software (Stata Corporation). Descriptive statistics of the scores for coping strategies among the study participants were calculated, including mean, median, minimum, maximum, and standard deviation. Bivariate linear regression was utilized to examine the association between the score given by the participant to each coping mechanism and the level of social support (MSPSS scores) among the study participants. Multivariate linear regression modelling was performed to evaluate the association between the score of each coping strategy domain and the level of social support among the caregivers while controlling for their sociodemographic status. A significance level of p < 0.05 was used.

    Of the 789 caregivers of cancer patients invited, 730 agreed to participate and 579 completed the survey (participation rate of 73.38%). The majority of caregivers were women (68.5%; n = 396), completed secondary or higher education (79.2%; n = 412) and married to the patients (46.8%; n = 270) (Table 1). Almost 58% of caregivers were 45 years of age or older. For employment status, 93.5% (n = 519) of caregivers reported that they had a paid job at the time of the interview. Almost half of the participants (48.1%; n = 275) were primarily responsible for both finances and care to the patient. The results show the majority of caregivers were under a financial burden (82.1%; n = 473). Levels of social support were relatively evenly distributed among the participants, with low, middle, and high social support being reported at 29.7% (n = 172), 37.1% (n = 215), and 33.2% (n = 192), respectively.

    When asked about the ways caregivers confront the issue, the results, as defined by the BCI, showed that the caregivers' mean level of utilizing emotional strategy coping mechanisms was 31.4 ± 4.8, while the mean score of using the problem strategy and dysfunctional strategy were lower with 20.2 ± 3.2 and 29.6 ± 6.7, respectively.

    Table 2 presents the mean scores and standard deviation of 14 coping styles among the study caregivers. The three leading coping strategies utilized were: acceptance (6.9 + 1.4), active coping (7.2 ± 1.3) and positive reframing (7.0 ± 1.3). Results demonstrated that substance use was the least utilized way to cope (3.3 ± 1.7).

    Table 1.  General characteristics of the study caregivers.
    Factor Value
    N 579
    Sex
     Men 182 (31.5%)
     Women 396 (68.5%)
    Caregivers age
     <45 247 (42.7%)
     ≥45 332 (57.3%)
    Education
     Incomplete secondary school 153 (27.1%)
     Secondary school and higher 412 (72.9%)
    Occupation
     Unemployed 36 (6.5%)
     Employed 519 (93.5%)
    Relationship to patient
     Spouse 270 (46.8%)
     Children 139 (24.1%)
     Others 168 (29.1%)
    Support given to patient
     Finance and Care 275 (48.1%)
     Finance or Care 196 (34.3%)
     Other 101 (17.7%)
    Financial difficulty
     Yes 473 (82.1%)
     No 103 (17.9%)
    Location
     Hanoi 438 (75.6%)
     Da Nang 63 (10.9%)
     Ho Chi Minh 78 (13.5%)
    Social Support (defined by MSPSS)
     Low support 172 (29.7%)
     Moderate support 215 (37.1%)
     High support 192 (33.2%)
    Coping dimensions
     Problem focused Coping, mean (SD) 20.2 (3.2)
     Emotion focused Coping, mean (SD) 31.4 (4.8)
     Dysfunctional Coping, mean (SD) 29.6 (6.7)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 2.  Mean score and standard deviation of coping strategies among cancer caregivers.
    Factor Mean (Standard deviation)
    N 579
    Active Coping 7.2 (1.3)
    Planning 6.2 (1.6)
    Instrumental Support 6.8 (1.4)
    Emotional Support 6.7 (1.6)
    Positive reframing 7.0 (1.3)
    Acceptance 6.9 (1.4)
    Religion 5.3 (2.2)
    Humor 5.5 (1.5)
    Self-Distraction 5.9 (1.8)
    Venting 6.1 (1.5)
    Denial 5.8 (1.9)
    Behavioral Disengagement 4.1 (2.0)
    Substance use 3.3 (1.7)
    Self-Blame 4.4 (2.0)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    All the different coping strategies were significantly associated with the level of support that caregivers reported receiving from social activities (p < 0.001), except three strategies (behavioral disengagement, substance use and self-blame). Overall, the participants who reported receiving high social support had higher mean scores in almost all the strategies as compared to those who reported low or moderate social support.

    Table 3.  Bivariate analysis of associations between caregivers' social support and different coping strategies.
    Coping strategies Social support
    p-value
    Low support Mean (SD) Moderate support Mean (SD) High support Mean (SD)
    N 172 215 192
    Active Coping 6.7 (1.5) 7.3 (1.1) 7.5 (1.0) <0.001
    Planning 5.7 (1.7) 6.2 (1.7) 6.6 (1.5) <0.001
    Instrumental Support 6.1 (1.5) 7.0 (1.2) 7.2 (1.1) <0.001
    Emotional Support 6.0 (1.9) 6.7 (1.4) 7.2 (1.2) <0.001
    Positive reframing 6.5 (1.6) 7.2 (1.1) 7.3 (1.1) <0.001
    Acceptance 6.5 (1.7) 6.9 (1.3) 7.3 (1.1) <0.001
    Religion 4.8 (2.2) 5.2 (2.2) 5.8 (2.1) <0.001
    Humor 5.1 (1.4) 5.5 (1.4) 5.9 (1.6) <0.001
    Self-Distraction 5.3 (1.8) 6.0 (1.7) 6.3 (1.8) <0.001
    Venting 5.7 (1.6) 6.1 (1.5) 6.5 (1.3) <0.001
    Denial 5.3 (2.1) 5.8 (1.9) 6.2 (1.8) <0.001
    Behavioral disengagement 4.1 (1.9) 4.1 (2.0) 4.1 (2.1) 0.96
    Substance use 3.5 (1.6) 3.3 (1.9) 3.1 (1.6) 0.068
    Self-Blame 4.6 (1.9) 4.2 (1.8) 4.4 (2.2) 0.21

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Table 4 illustrates the correlation between social support and three coping dimensions among the caregivers of cancer patients in our study. Results from simple linear regression analysis show that there were statistically significant associations between the level of social support and each coping dimensions. In particular, moderate and high support were both significantly positively correlated with both the problem-focused coping style (coefficient 1.93, [95% CI: 1.33, 2.54] and coefficient 2.78, [95% CI: 2.16, 3.40], respectively) and the emotion-focused coping style (coefficient 2.65, [95% CI: 1.76, 3.54] and coefficient 4.56, [95% CI: 3.65, 5.47], respectively). Regarding the dysfunctional coping styles, high support had a significant positive association (coefficient 2.15, [95% CI: 0.77, 3.53]), meanwhile, moderate support had no statistically significant correlation (coefficient 1.12, [95% CI: −0.22, 2.46]).

    Table 4.  Relationship between social support and three coping dimensions.
    Social support (defined by MSPSS) Coping dimensions
    Problem_focused Coping Coefficient [95% CI] Emotion_focused Coping Coefficient [95% CI] Dysfunctional Coping Coefficient [95% CI]
    Low support 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00]
    Moderate support 1.93*** [1.33, 2.54] 2.65*** [1.76, 3.54] 1.12 [−0.22, 2.46]
    High support 2.78*** [2.16, 3.40] 4.56*** [3.65, 5.47] 2.15** [0.77, 3.53]
    Constant 18.59*** [18.14, 19.04] 28.92*** [28.26–29.59] 28.50*** [27.5, 29.5]
    r2 0.12 0.14 0.02
    N 579.00 579.00 579.00

    Note: *p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Three linear regression models were constructed, linking social support with each dimension of problem-focused, emotion-focused, and dysfunctional coping. Such models were controlled for caregiver's gender, age group, educational level, occupation, type of support given, and financial difficulty (Table 5). In these models, after adjusting for other general characteristics of study participants, higher social support level was significantly correlated with higher scores of problem-focused coping (coefficient 2.66, [95% CI: 2.00, 3.32]), emotion-focused coping (coefficient 4.39, [95% CI: 3.40, 5.37]) and dysfunctional coping styles (coefficient 2.13, [95% CI: 0.65, 3.61]). Moderate social support was also significantly associated with higher scores of problem-focused coping (coefficient 1.82, [95% CI: 1.19, 2.45]) and emotion-focused coping styles (coefficient 2.54, [95% CI: 1.59, 3.48]).

    The results also showed that the 45 years and older age group was significantly negatively related to problem-focused coping style (coefficient −0.55, [95% CI: −1.08, −0.02]). Having no financial difficulty had a significant inverse correlation with problem-focused coping style (coefficient −0.80, [95% CI: −1.48, −0.12]) and dysfunctional coping style (coefficient −1.97, [95% CI: −3.49, −0.44]). Being employed was associated with dysfunctional coping style (coefficient 3.19, [95% CI: 0.71, 5.67]). Supporting the patient in either finance or care was significantly correlated to emotion-focused coping style (coefficient 1.14, [95% CI: 0.28, 2.00]) and dysfunctional coping style (coefficient 2.25, [95% CI: 0.96, 3.54]). Gender and education level were not found to be significantly correlated with any coping strategy.

    Table 5.  Linear regression analysis of factors associated with three coping dimensions.
    Coping dimensions
    Problem_focused Coping Coefficient [95% CI] Emotion_focused Coping Coefficient [95% CI] Dysfunctional Coping Coefficient [95% CI]
    Social support (defined by MSPSS)
     Low support 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00]
     Moderate support 1.82*** [1.19, 2.45] 2.54*** [1.59, 3.48] 0.89 [−0.53, 2.31]
     High support 2.66*** [2.00, 3.32] 4.39*** [3.40, 5.37] 2.13** [0.65, 3.61]
    Gender
     Men 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00]
     Women −0.09 [−0.64, 0.45] 0.77 [−0.04, 1.59] −0.18 [−1.41, 1.04]
    Caregivers age group
     <45 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00]
     ≥45 −0.55* [−1.08, −0.02] −0.48 [−1.27, 0.31] −0.71 [−1.90, 0.48]
    Education
     Incomplete secondary school 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00]
     Secondary school and higher −0.47 [−1.05, 0.11] −0.73 [−1.60, 0.14] −0.56 [−1.87, 0.75]
    Occupation
     Unemployed 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00]
     Employed −0.02 [−1.12, 1.08] −1.10 [−2.75, 0.55] 3.19* [0.71, 5.67]
    Support given to patient
     Finance and Care 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00]
     Finance or Care 0.46 [−0.11, 1.04] 1.14** [0.28, 2.00] 2.25*** [0.96, 3.54]
     Others 0.05 [−0.71, 0.81] 0.06 [−1.08, 1.19] 0.70 [−1.01, 2.41]
    Financial difficulty
     Yes 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] 0.00 [0.00, 0.00]
     No −0.80* [−1.48, −0.12] −0.07 [−1.08, 0.94] −1.97* [−3.49, −0.44]
     Constant 19.34*** [17.96, 20.73] 29.86*** [27.79, 31.93] 26.19*** [23.08, 29.30]
    r2 0.14 0.17 0.06
    N 533.00 533.00 533.00

    Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first studies about caregivers of cancer patients in Vietnam examining their uses of coping strategies and investigating the relationship between coping mechanisms and social support. Determining not only the coping styles utilized by the Vietnamese caregivers when they experience caregiver burdens but also whether there are any correlations between social supports and coping strategies is an important starting point to develop appropriate public health interventions supporting caregivers in the future.

    We found that active coping, acceptance, and positive reframing were three most preferable coping strategies utilized by caregivers of patients diagnosed with cancer in Vietnam. Substance use was the least used coping mechanism of the respondents. Additionally, a significant positive correlation was found between high level of social support and mechanisms of coping.

    Our findings revealed that the most utilized coping strategy among Vietnamese cancer caregivers was emotion-focused coping, while dysfunctional coping was least used.This was in accordance with reports demonstrated by other studies using Brief COPE on caregivers of cancer patients [10],[33],[41], caregivers of dependent older adult relatives [42], caregivers of stroke patients [43] or caregivers of elderly people with dementia [44]. This result indicated that Vietnamese caregivers of cancer patients tend to use positive strategies to solve their problems, which is consistent with findings from previous studies of Nguyen Thi Thanh Mai et.al. on coping strategies in Vietnamese parents of children with cancer [35],[36]. However, in our study, emotion-focused coping was preferred to use than problem-focused coping, which differed from results of some previous studies that problem-focused coping was more often utilized [22]. In addition, one of the problem-focused strategies, active coping, is the most widely utilized coping strategy of caregivers in our study. Some previous studies indicated that people who used problem-focused coping styles more frequently than others tend to experience less anxiety, depression, and hopelessness and also experience an increase in quality of life [45][47].

    Substance use, self-blame, and behavioral disengagement were reported as harmful coping strategies by several studies. Although creating a temporary relief from the burden, it was reported that the utilization of these maladaptive coping strategies is related to psychological distress such as depression and anxiety [41],[48],[49]. Our study showed that there was a significant portion of participants which reported that they used these unhealthy coping strategies, which were similar to the findings of other authors [50],[51]. In fact, caregivers in our study as well as widely in Vietnam were mostly family members or close relatives with cancer patients, who are quite sensitive to pressures and emotional strains that are related to cancer patients' health condition. These findings suggest some possible methods to improve effective coping in Vietnamese cancer caregivers such as family or friend support interventions.

    Our study results highlight the patterns of correlations that might exist between coping strategies and levels of social support. In particular, after controlling for gender, age, educational level, occupation, types of support and financial difficulty, we found that high social support showed a significant positive association with all coping mechanisms including problem-focused coping, emotion-focused coping and dysfunctional coping. Moderate social support also had a significant positive relationship with problem-focused coping and emotion-focused coping. This aligned with findings from previous studies that social support is connected to the utilization of coping styles [27],[33],[52]. Other literature also revealed that social support can inspire proactive coping [29],[30]. In the context of Vietnam, where people often live within the communities with the same cultural characteristics and strong social cohesion, social support plays an important role in encouraging cancer caregivers to use positive coping styles to deal with their stressful situations. Additionally, Hsu and Tung showed that coping strategies had mediate effect from social support to deal with difficulties and stress symptoms [53]. This could be explained by the ability of social support in reducing harmful disengagement coping mechanisms (such as denial, self-blame or substance use behaviors) and in encouraging advantageous engagement coping mechanisms (such as active coping, planning or positive reframing). This is because someone in a person's social network may always be willing to assist them in overcoming mental health challenges [27],[52].

    In addition, findings from our study also demonstrated that the 45 years and older age group and those having no financial difficulty were significantly inversely correlated with problem-focused coping style. Supporting the patient in either finances or care was significantly correlated to emotion-focused coping style. Being employed and supporting the patient in finances or care were positively associated with the dysfunctional coping style. Having no financial difficulty was significantly negatively related to dysfunctional coping style. However, there was no significant difference between male and female caregivers in the utilization of any coping strategy in our study, which is dissimilar to the previous finding of Han et al. [33]. This study has several limitations that need to be considered. First, since this is a cross-sectional study, we cannot examine whether the relationships are a result of reciprocity or causality. Accordingly, further longitudinal studies with follow-up periods should be conducted in the future to overcome this limitation. Secondly, potential selection bias could have occurred due to the convenience sampling technique utilized, which could affect the generalizability of the study results. In addition, this is a hospital-based study, therefore, our findings might not be representative of all caregivers of patients with cancer in Vietnam. Further studies should be conducted to explore any possible changes in the coping styles of caregivers of patients with cancer throughout the cancer treatment journey.

    This study demonstrated that active coping, positive reframing, and acceptance mechanisms were the three most frequently used coping mechanisms among cancer caregivers; meanwhile, substance use was the least utilized. A significant positive correlation was found between a high level of social support and the utilization of positive coping strategies. Receiving a high level of social support and utilizing positive coping strategies enables caregivers to mitigate their caregiving burden, control the situation, and enhance the caregiver's quality of life. Therefore, it is necessary to develop appropriate public health interventions manipulating social support and positive coping strategies in order to support caregivers of cancer patients dealing with their stressful situations, thereby, help to improve patient care.


    Acknowledgments



    The authors sincerely thank the Tan Trieu National Cancer Hospital, Ho Chi Minh Oncology Hospital, Da Nang Oncology Hospital, and the patients and their caregivers for their valuable contribution to this study. We would also like to acknowledge the interviewers who contributed to the data collection process. We also wish to thank Allison Shaffer and Hoang Thao Anh for English language support. Nguyen Xuan Long and Nguyen Bao Ngoc contributed equally to this paper.

    Funding



    This research is funded by the Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) under grant number 501.01-2018.302.

    Ethical considerations



    Our study was approved by The Institutional Review Board of Hanoi University of Public Health in Vietnam (Decision No 424/2019/YTCC-HD3). All participants were notified of the study information, informed of their rights as study participants and provided informed consent voluntary.

    Conflict of interest



    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.

    [1] World Health Organization Cancer (2019) .Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cancer.
    [2] Jeong A, An JY (2017) The moderating role of social support on depression and anxiety for gastric cancer patients and their family caregivers. PloS One 12: e0189808. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189808
    [3] Kaimal G, Carroll-Haskins K, Mensinger JL, et al. (2019) Outcomes of art therapy and coloring for professional and informal caregivers of patients in a radiation oncology unit: A mixed methods pilot study. Eur J Oncol Nurs 42: 153-161. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2019.08.006
    [4] Glajchen M (2004) The emerging role and needs of family caregivers in cancer care. J Supportive Oncol 2: 145-155.
    [5] Geng H, Chuang D, Yang F, et al. (2018) Prevalence and determinants of depression in caregivers of cancer patients. Medicine 97.
    [6] Katende G, Nakimera L (2017) Prevalence and correlates of anxiety and depression among family carers of cancer patients in a cancer care and treatment facility in Uganda: a cross-sectional study. Afr Health Sci 17: 868-876. doi: 10.4314/ahs.v17i3.30
    [7] Lee YH, Liao YC, Liao WY, et al. (2013) Anxiety, depression and related factors in family caregivers of newly diagnosed lung cancer patients before first treatment. Psychooncology 22: 2617-2623. doi: 10.1002/pon.3328
    [8] Park B, Kim SY, Shin JY, et al. (2013) Prevalence and predictors of anxiety and depression among family caregivers of cancer patients: a nationwide survey of patient–family caregiver dyads in Korea. Supportive Care Cancer 21: 2799-2807. doi: 10.1007/s00520-013-1852-1
    [9] Rhee YS, Yun YH, Park S, et al. (2008) Depression in family caregivers of cancer patients: the feeling of burden as a predictor of depression. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 26: 5890-5895. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.3957
    [10] Perez-Ordóñez F, Frías-Osuna A, Romero-Rodríguez Y, et al. (2016) Coping strategies and anxiety in caregivers of palliative cancer patients. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 25: 600-607. doi: 10.1111/ecc.12507
    [11] Aydogan U, Doganer YC, Komurcu S, et al. (2016) Coping Attitudes of Cancer Patients and Their Caregivers and Quality of Life of Caregivers. Indian J Palliat Care 22: 150-156. doi: 10.4103/0973-1075.179598
    [12] Folkman S (1984) Personal control and stress and coping processes: a theoretical analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol 46: 839-852. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.839
    [13] Karabulutlu EY, Bilici M, Çayır K, et al. (2010) Coping, Anxiety and Depression in Turkish Patients with Cancer. Electron J Gen Med 7. doi: 10.29333/ejgm/82872
    [14] Hawken T, Turner-Cobb J, Barnett J (2018) Coping and adjustment in caregivers: A systematic review. Health Psychol Open 5: 2055102918810659. doi: 10.1177/2055102918810659
    [15] Redinbaugh EM, Baum A, Tarbell S, et al. (2003) End-of-life caregiving: what helps family caregivers cope? J Palliat Med 6: 901-909. doi: 10.1089/109662103322654785
    [16] Kershaw T, Northouse L, Kritpracha C, et al. (2004) Coping strategies and quality of life in women with advanced breast cancer and their family caregivers. Psychol Health 19: 139-155. doi: 10.1080/08870440310001652687
    [17] Yoshimoto SM, Ghorbani S, Baer JM, et al. (2006) Religious coping and problem-solving by couples faced with prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 15: 481-488. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2006.00700.x
    [18] Fitzell A, Pakenham KI (2010) Application of a stress and coping model to positive and negative adjustment outcomes in colorectal cancer caregiving. Psychooncology 19: 1171-1178. doi: 10.1002/pon.1666
    [19] Ko CM, Malcarne VL, Varni JW, et al. (2005) Problem-solving and distress in prostate cancer patients and their spousal caregivers. Supportive Care Cancer 13: 367-374. doi: 10.1007/s00520-004-0748-5
    [20] Sahler OJZ, Varni JW, Fairclough DL, et al. (2002) Problem-solving skills training for mothers of children with newly diagnosed cancer: a randomized trial. J Dev Behav Pediatr JDBP 23: 77-86. doi: 10.1097/00004703-200204000-00003
    [21] Papastavrou E, Charalambous A, Tsangari H (2012) How do informal caregivers of patients with cancer cope: A descriptive study of the coping strategies employed. Eur J Oncol Nurs Off J Eur Oncol Nurs Soc 16: 258-263. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2011.06.001
    [22] Tan M (2007) Social support and coping in Turkish patients with cancer. Cancer Nurs 30: 498-504. doi: 10.1097/01.NCC.0000300158.60273.ba
    [23] Teixeira RJ, Applebaum AJ, Bhatia S, et al. (2018) The impact of coping strategies of cancer caregivers on psychophysiological outcomes: an integrative review. Psychol Res Behav Manag 11: 207-215. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S164946
    [24] Faronbi JO (2018) Correlate of burden and coping ability of caregivers of older adults with chronic illness in Nigeria. Scand J Caring Sci 32: 1288-1296. doi: 10.1111/scs.12572
    [25] Greenglass ER (2002) Proactive coping and quality of life management. Beyond coping: Meeting goals, visions, and challenges New York: Oxford University Press, 37-62. doi: 10.1093/med:psych/9780198508144.003.0003
    [26] Drageset S, Lindstrøm TC (2003) The mental health of women with suspected breast cancer: the relationship between social support, anxiety, coping and defence in maintaining mental health. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 10: 401-409. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2850.2003.00618.x
    [27] Roohafza HR, Afshar H, Keshteli AH, et al. (2014) What's the role of perceived social support and coping styles in depression and anxiety? J Res Med Sci Off J Isfahan Univ Med Sci 19: 944-949.
    [28] Dumont M, Provost MA (1999) Resilience in adolescents: Protective role of social support, coping strategies, self-esteem, and social activities on experience of stress and depression. J Youth Adolesc 28: 343-363. doi: 10.1023/A:1021637011732
    [29] Fiksenbaum LM, Greenglass ER, Eaton J (2006) Perceived Social Support, Hassles, and Coping Among the Elderly. J Appl Gerontol 25: 17-30. doi: 10.1177/0733464805281908
    [30] Holahan CJ, Valentiner DP, Moos RH (1995) Parental support, coping strategies, and psychological adjustment: An integrative model with late adolescents. J Youth Adolesc 24: 633-648. doi: 10.1007/BF01536948
    [31] van Rijen EHM, Utens EMWJ, Roos-Hesselink JW, et al. (2004) Styles of coping and social support in a cohort of adults with congenital heart disease. Cardiol Young 14: 122-130. doi: 10.1017/S1047951104002033
    [32] Kim J, Han JY, Shaw B, et al. (2010) The roles of social support and coping strategies in predicting breast cancer patients' emotional well-being: testing mediation and moderation models. J Health Psychol 15: 543-552. doi: 10.1177/1359105309355338
    [33] Han Y, Hu D, Liu Y, et al. (2014) Coping styles and social support among depressed Chinese family caregivers of patients with esophageal cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs 18: 571-577. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2014.07.002
    [34] International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Global Cancer Observatory—Vietnam Population fact sheets (2019) .
    [35] Nguyen TTM (2012) Ways of coping among parents of children receiving the cancer diagnosis in Vietnam. J Pract Med 854: 8-11.
    [36] Nguyen TTM (2013) Coping strategies among parents of cancer children one year after diagnosis. J Pract Med 6: 67-73.
    [37] Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK (1989) Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol 56: 267-283. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.56.2.267
    [38] Yusoff N, Low WY, Yip CH (2010) Reliability and validity of the Brief COPE Scale (English version) among women with breast cancer undergoing treatment of adjuvant chemotherapy: a Malaysian study. Med J Malaysia 65: 41-44.
    [39] Carver CS (1997) You want to measure coping but your protocol' too long: Consider the brief cope. Int J Behav Med 4: 92. doi: 10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6
    [40] Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, et al. (1988) The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J Pers Assess 52: 30-41. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2
    [41] Costas-Muñiz R (2012) Hispanic adolescents coping with parental cancer. Supportive Care Cancer 20: 413-417. doi: 10.1007/s00520-011-1283-9
    [42] Pérez-Cruz M, Parra-Anguita L, López-Martínez C, et al. (2019) Coping and Anxiety in Caregivers of Dependent Older Adult Relatives. Int J Environ Res Public Health 16.
    [43] Qiu Y, Li S (2008) Stroke: coping strategies and depression among Chinese caregivers of survivors during hospitalisation. J Clin Nurs 17: 1563-1573. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.02156.x
    [44] Li R, Cooper C, Bradley J, et al. (2012) Coping strategies and psychological morbidity in family carers of people with dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord 139: 1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.05.055
    [45] Folkman S (2013) Stress: Appraisal and Coping. Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine New York, NY: Springer, 1913-1915. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_215
    [46] Ramanakumar AV, Balakrishna Y, Ramarao G (2005) Coping mechanisms among long-term survivors of breast and cervical cancers in Mumbai, India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev APJCP 6: 189-194.
    [47] Tuncay T (2014) Coping and quality of life in Turkish women living with ovarian cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev APJCP 15: 4005-4012. doi: 10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.9.4005
    [48] Parekh NK, Shah S, McMaster K, et al. (2017) Effects of caregiver burden on quality of life and coping strategies utilized by caregivers of adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Ann Gastroenterol Q Publ Hell Soc Gastroenterol 30: 89-95.
    [49] Meyer B (2001) Coping with Severe Mental Illness: Relations of the Brief COPE with Symptoms, Functioning, and Well-Being. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 23: 265-277. doi: 10.1023/A:1012731520781
    [50] Lala A, Sturzu L, Picard J, et al. (2016) Coping behavior and risk and resilience stress factors in French regional emergency medicine unit workers: a cross-sectional survey. J Med Life 9: 363-368.
    [51] Folkman S, Moskowitz JT (2004) Coping: pitfalls and promise. Annu Rev Psychol 55: 745-774. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141456
    [52] Tao S, Dong Q, Pratt MW, et al. (2000) Social support: Relations to coping and adjustment during the transition to university in the People's Republic of China. J Adolesc Res 15: 123-144. doi: 10.1177/0743558400151007
    [53] Hsu HC, Tung HJ (2010) What makes you good and happy? Effects of internal and external resources to adaptation and psychological well-being for the disabled elderly in Taiwan. Aging Ment Health 14: 851-860. doi: 10.1080/13607861003800997
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Behzad Hamedani, Mousa Alavi, Fariba Taleghani, Malek Fereidoonimoghadam, Challenges of Help-Seeking in Iranian Family Caregivers of Patients with Cancer: A Qualitative Study, 2022, 15, 2538-4422, 10.5812/ijcm-127060
    2. Simpson Nuwamanya, Rahel Nkola, Sarah Maria Najjuka, Harriet Nabulo, Firoj Al‐Mamun, Mohammed A. Mamun, Mark Mohan Kaggwa, Depression in Ugandan caregivers of cancer patients: The role of coping strategies and social support, 2023, 32, 1057-9249, 113, 10.1002/pon.6057
    3. Ammar Elgadi, Aseel Hisham, Hayat A. Ahmed, Hiba Ali Elzaki, Kamil Merghani Ali shaaban, Ola Dafaalla, Osama Ahmed Elkhidir, Salma S. Alrawa, Tahani Amin Mahmoud, Waad Wadidi, Economic hardship among principal family caregivers of cancer patients at Khartoum oncology hospital 2020: a cross-sectional study, 2022, 22, 1472-6963, 10.1186/s12913-022-08918-y
    4. Parimehr Ayar, Sayed Kazem Mousavi, Mahnaz Seyedshohadaee, The Effect of Coping Skills Training on Family Caregivers' Burden of Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy, 2021, 9, 2345-346X, 235, 10.52547/ijhehp.9.3.235
    5. Pham Tieu Kieu, Nguyen Lam Vuong, Do Van Dung, Validation of Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) in Vietnamese Among People Living with HIV/AIDS, 2023, 1090-7165, 10.1007/s10461-022-03974-1
    6. Ahtisham Younas, Marco Di Nitto, Angela Cuoco, Bridgette Brawner- Rice, Josiane Boyne, Raul Juarez-Vela, Ercole Vellone, Lucinda J. Graven, Alberto Dal Molin, Angela Durante, Tushar Singh, Perceived Social Support and Associated Factors among Caregivers of Individuals with Heart Failure: A Convergent Mixed Methods Study, 2023, 2023, 0966-0410, 1, 10.1155/2023/5550987
    7. Shakiba Moosivand, Omid Nazari, Ali Shahverdi, Mohammad Gholami, Rasool Mohammadi, Sajad Yarahmadi, Predictors of emotional intelligence among family caregivers of cancer patients: A cross‐sectional study, 2024, 7, 2573-8348, 10.1002/cnr2.1943
    8. Eva Y. N. Yuen, Megan Hale, Carlene Wilson, The role of social support among caregivers of people with cancer from Chinese and Arabic communities: a qualitative study, 2024, 32, 0941-4355, 10.1007/s00520-024-08502-6
    9. Emanueli Amosi Msengi, Emmanuel Z. Chona, Rashid A. Gosse, Joel S. Ambikile, Kumari Shweta Kalyani, Coping Mechanisms Used by Male Partners of Women Diagnosed with Cervical Cancer: An Explorative Qualitative Study at Ocean Road Cancer Institute in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, 2024, 2024, 1365-2524, 1, 10.1155/2024/8879829
    10. Anteneh Dirar, Wubegzier Mekonnen, Zena Berhanu, Social support experiences of cervical cancer patients at tikur anbessa specialized hospital, addis ababa, ethiopia: a qualitative study, 2022, 11, 24755494, 1, 10.15406/mojwh.2022.11.00299
    11. Myriel Hermann, Ute Goerling, Charis Hearing, Anja Mehnert‐Theuerkauf, Beate Hornemann, Peter Hövel, Sabrina Reinicke, Hanna Zingler, Tanja Zimmermann, Jochen Ernst, Social Support, Depression and Anxiety in Cancer Patient‐Relative Dyads in Early Survivorship: An Actor‐Partner Interdependence Modeling Approach, 2024, 33, 1057-9249, 10.1002/pon.70038
    12. Clarita Shynal Martis, Ramesh Chandrababu, Vani Lakshmi R, Rajeshkrishna Panambur Bhandary, Debbie Tolson, Panambur Venkataraya Bhandary, Elsa Sanatombi Devi, Caregivers’ awareness regarding the care of dementia and the coping strategies among the caregivers of people with dementia: a cross-sectional study in Udupi District, Karnataka, 2024, 11, 2544-8994, 447, 10.2478/fon-2024-0049
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(6182) PDF downloads(548) Cited by(12)

Figures and Tables

Tables(5)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog