Research Article| Volume 37, P65-73, December 2018

A pilot randomised controlled trial of a multimodal supportive care (ThriverCare) intervention for managing unmet supportive care needs in men with metastatic prostate cancer on hormonal treatment and their partner/caregivers

Published:November 14, 2018DOI:



      Men with metastatic prostate cancer experience high levels of unmet supportive care needs in current healthcare delivery. We set out to determine the effectiveness of a multimodality supportive care (ThriverCare) intervention on the prevalence of unmet supportive care needs for men and their partner/caregivers.


      A prospective parallel group, pilot randomised controlled pilot trial in 4 hospitals in Scotland. 38 participants with radiologically proven metastatic prostate cancer disease and 10 partners/caregivers were recruited into the study. A two arm 1:1 study design compared the usual standard of care (SC) approach to SC plus ThriverCare intervention. The primary outcome was the Supportive Care Needs Survey at 3 months of intervention.


      There was no statistical significant difference in the prevalence of unmet supportive care needs between the intervention group and the usual SC group at baseline p = 0.112, however a statistically significant difference was observed at 3 months, indicating that the prevalence of unmet supportive care needs were less in the intervention group (1.13, SD 2.5) compared to the usual SC (6.17, SD 7.05), p = 0.002.


      ThriverCare appears to improve the supportive care experience of men with metastatic prostate cancer on hormonal treatment and their partner/caregivers. Our results accentuate that no longer one size of care delivery fits all, care must be responsive and adaptable to meet the individual needs of people affected by cancer to thrive.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to European Journal of Oncology Nursing
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Abernethy A.P.
        • Zafar S.Y.
        • Uronis H.
        • Wheeler J.L.
        • Coan A.
        • Rowe K.
        • Shelby R.A.
        • Fowler R.
        • Herndon 2nd, J.E.
        Validation of the Patient Care Monitor (Version 2.0): a review of system assessment instrument for cancer patients.
        J. Pain Symptom Manag. 2010; 40: 545-558
        • Billingham S.
        • Whitehead A.
        • Julious S.
        An audit of sample sizes for pilot and feasibility trials being undertaken in the United Kingdom registered in the United Kingdom Clinical Research Network database.
        BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2013; 13: 104
        • Bonevski B.
        • Sanson-Fisher R.
        • Girgis A.
        • Burton L.
        • Cook P.
        • Boyes A.
        Evaluation of an instrument to assess the needs of patients with cancer. Supportive care review group.
        Cancer. 2000; 88: 217-225
        • Bourke L.
        • Sohanpal R.
        • Nanton V.
        • Crank H.
        • Rosario D.J.
        • Saxton J.M.
        A qualitative study evaluating experiences of a lifestyle intervention in men with prostate cancer undergoing androgen suppression therapy.
        Trials. 2012; 13: 208
        • Carmack Taylor C.L.
        • Smith M.A.
        • de Moor C.
        • Dunn A.L.
        • Pettaway C.
        • Sellin R.
        • Charnsangavej C.
        • Hansen M.C.
        • Gritz E.R.
        Quality of life intervention for prostate cancer patients: design and baseline characteristics of the active for life after cancer trial.
        Contr. Clin. Trials. 2004; 25: 265-285
        • Carter N.
        • Bryant-Lukosius D.
        • DiCenso A.
        • Blythe J.
        • Neville A.J.
        The supportive care needs of men with advanced prostate cancer.
        Oncol. Nurs. Forum. 2011; 38: 189-198
        • Chambers S.K.
        • Hyde M.K.
        • Laurie K.
        • Legg M.
        • Frydenberg M.
        • Davis I.D.
        • Lowe A.
        • Dunn J.
        Experiences of Australian men diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer: a qualitative study.
        BMJ Open. 2018; 8e019917
        • Cockle-Hearne J.
        • Charnay-Sonnek F.
        • Denis L.
        • Fairbanks H.E.
        • Kelly D.
        • Kav S.
        • Leonard K.
        • van Muilekom E.
        • Fernandez-Ortega P.
        • Jensen B.T.
        • Faithfull S.
        The impact of supportive nursing care on the needs of men with prostate cancer: a study across seven European countries.
        Br. J. Canc. 2013; 109: 2121-2130
        • Craig P.
        • Dieppe P.
        • Macintyre S.
        • Michie S.
        • Nazareth I.
        • Petticrew M.
        Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance.
        Br Med J. 2008; 337
        • Doyle N.
        • Henry R.
        Holistic needs assessment: rationale and practical implementation.
        Cancer Nurs. Pract. 2014; 13: 16-21
        • Fitzpatrick J.M.
        • Bellmunt J.
        • Fizazi K.
        • Heidenreich A.
        • Sternberg C.N.
        • Tombal B.
        • Alcaraz A.
        • Bahl A.
        • Bracarda S.
        • Di Lorenzo G.
        • Efstathiou E.
        • Finn S.P.
        • FossÃ¥ S.
        • Gillessen S.
        • Kellokumpu-Lehtinen P.-L.
        • Lecouvet F.d.r.E.
        • Oudard S.
        • de Reijke T.M.
        • Robson C.N.
        • De Santis M.
        • Seruga B.
        • de Wit R.
        Optimal management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: highlights from a European expert consensus panel.
        Eur. J. Canc. 2014; 50: 1617-1627
        • Greenhalgh J.
        The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why?.
        Qual. Life Res. 2009; 18: 115-123
        • Hofman A.
        Enhancing self-efficacy for optimised patient reported outcomes through the theory of symptom self-management.
        Cancer Nurs. 2013; 36: E16-E26
        • Holm L.V.
        • Hansen D.G.
        • Kragstrup J.
        • Johansen C.
        • Christensen R.
        • Vedsted P.
        • Sondergaard J.
        Influence of comorbidity on cancer patients' rehabilitation needs, participation in rehabilitation activities and unmet needs: a population-based cohort study.
        Support. Care Canc. 2014; 22: 2095-2105
        • Hui D.
        Definition of supportive care: does the semantic matter?.
        Curr. Opin. Oncol. 2014; 26: 372-379
        • Jensen R.E.
        • Snyder C.F.
        • Abernethy A.P.
        • Basch E.
        • Potosky A.L.
        • Roberts A.C.
        • Loeffler D.R.
        • Reeve B.B.
        Review of electronic patient-reported outcomes systems used in cancer clinical care.
        J. Oncol. Pract. 2014; 10: e215-222
        • Kang M.
        • Ragan B.G.
        • Park J.-H.
        Issues in outcomes research: an overview of randomization techniques for clinical trials.
        J. Athl. Train. 2008; 43: 215-221
        • King A.J.L.
        • Evans M.
        • Moore T.H.M.
        • Paterson C.
        • Sharp D.
        • Persad R.
        • Huntley A.L.
        Prostate cancer and supportive care: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis of men's experiences and unmet needs.
        Eur. J. Canc. Care. 2015; 24: 618-634
        • McCabe M.S.
        • Bhatia S.
        • Oeffinger K.C.
        • Reaman G.H.
        • Tyne C.
        • Wollins D.S.
        • Hudson M.M.
        American society of clinical oncology statement: achieving high-quality cancer survivorship care.
        J. Clin. Oncol. 2013; 31: 631-640
        • Menichetti J.
        • Villa S.
        • Magnani T.
        • Avuzzi B.
        • Bosetti D.
        • Marenghi C.
        • Morlino S.
        • Rancati T.
        • Van Poppel H.
        • Salvioni R.
        • Valdagni R.
        • Bellardita L.
        Lifestyle interventions to improve the quality of life of men with prostate cancer: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
        Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 2016; 108: 13-22
        • Moore T.H.M.
        • King A.J.L.
        • Evans M.
        • Sharp D.
        • Persad R.
        • Huntley A.L.
        Supportive care for men with prostate cancer: why are the trials not working? A systematic review and recommendations for future trials.
        Canc. Med. 2015; 4: 1240-1251
        • Northouse L.L.
        • Mood D.W.
        • Schafenacker A.
        • Montie J.E.
        • Sandler H.M.
        • Forman J.D.
        • Hussain M.
        • Pienta K.J.
        • Smith D.C.
        • Kershaw T.
        Randomized clinical trial of a family intervention for prostate cancer patients and their spouses.
        Cancer. 2007; 110: 2809-2818
        • Parahoo K.
        • McDonough S.
        • McCaughan E.
        • Noyes J.
        • Semple C.
        • Halstead E.J.
        • Neuberger M.M.
        • Dahm P.
        Psychosocial interventions for men with prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review.
        BJU Int. 2015; 116: 174-183
        • Paterson C.
        • Alashkham A.
        • Windsor P.
        • Nabi G.
        Management and treatment of men affected by metastatic prostate cancer: evidence-based recommendations for practice.
        Int. J. Urol. Nurs. 2016; 10: 44-55
        • Paterson C.
        • Kata G.
        • Nandwani G.
        • Daschaudhury D.
        • Nabi G.
        Unmet supportive care needs of men with locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer on hormonal treatment: a mixed methods study.
        Cancer Nurs. 2017; 40: 497-507
        • Paterson C.
        • Nabi G.
        A Model of consultation in prostate cancer care: evidence from a systematic review.
        Cancer Nurs. 2017; 40: 276-288
        • Paterson C.
        • Robertson A.
        • Smith A.
        • Nabi G.
        Identifying the unmet supportive care needs of men living with and beyond prostate cancer: a systematic review.
        Eur. J. Oncol. Nurs. 2015; 19: 405-418
        • Primeau C.
        • Paterson C.
        • Nabi G.
        A qualitative study exploring models of supportive care in men and their partners/caregivers affected by metastatic prostate cancer.
        Oncol. Nurs. Forum. 2017; : E241-E249
        • Schulz K.F.
        • Altman D.G.
        • Moher D.
        CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.
        Br Med J. 2010; 340
        • Snowden A.
        • Young J.
        • White C.
        • Murray E.
        • Richard C.
        • Lussier M.-T.
        • MacArthur E.
        • Storey D.
        • Schipani S.
        • Wheatley D.
        Evaluating holistic needs assessment in outpatient cancer care—a randomised controlled trial: the study protocol.
        BMJ Open. 2015; 5e006840
        • Stanciu M.A.
        • Morris C.
        • Makin M.
        • Watson E.
        • Bulger J.
        • Evans R.
        • Hiscock J.
        • Hoare Z.
        • Edwards R.T.
        • Neal R.D.
        A pilot randomised controlled trial of personalised care after treatment for prostate cancer (TOPCAT-P): nurse-led holistic-needs assessment and individualised psychoeducational intervention: study protocol.
        BMJ Open. 2015; 5e008470
        • Sternberg C.N.
        • Baskin-Bey E.S.
        • Watson M.
        • Worsfold A.
        • Rider A.
        • Tombal B.
        Treatment patterns and characteristics of European patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer.
        BMC Urol. 2013; 13 (58-58)
        • Tabachnick B.
        • Fidell L.
        Using Multivariate Statistics.
        Pearson Education, Boston2007
        • Watson E.
        • Shinkins B.
        • Frith E.
        • Neal D.
        • Hamdy F.
        • Walter F.
        • Weller D.
        • Wilkinson C.
        • Faithfull S.
        • Wolstenholme J.
        • Sooriakumaran P.
        • Kastner C.
        • Campbell C.
        • Neal R.
        • Butcher H.
        • Matthews M.
        • Perera R.
        • Rose P.
        Symptoms, unmet needs, psychological well-being and health status in survivors of prostate cancer: implications for redesigning follow-up.
        BJU Int. 2016; 117: E10-E19
        • Weiner D.
        • Burhansstipanov L.
        • Krebs L.U.
        • Restivo T.
        From survivorship to thrivership: native peoples weaving a healthy life from cancer.
        J. Canc. Educ. 2005; 20: 28-32
        • Whitehead A.L.
        • Julious S.A.
        • Cooper C.L.
        • Campbell M.J.
        Estimating the sample size for a pilot randomised trial to minimise the overall trial sample size for the external pilot and main trial for a continuous outcome variable.
        Stat. Methods Med. Res. 2016; 25: 1057-1073
        • Wight D.
        • Wimbush E.
        • Jepson R.
        • Doi L.
        Six steps in quality intervention development (6SQuID).
        J. Epidemiol. Community. 2016; 70: 520-525