Skip to main content
Download PDF

Illness perceptions, fear of progression and health-related quality of life during acute treatment and follow-up care in paediatric cancer patients and their parents: a cross-sectional study

BMC Psychology volume 11, Article number: 44 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

This study examines the role of illness perceptions and fear of progression (FoP) in paediatric cancer patients and their parents for patient’s health-related quality of life (HRQoL), controlling for sociodemographic and medical variables. 4–18-year-old patients in acute treatment or follow-up care and one parent were examined.

Methods

N = 46 patient-parent dyads in acute treatment and n = 84 dyads in follow-up care completed measures on illness perceptions (Illness-Perceptions-Questionnaire for 12–18-year-old patients and parents or as age-adapted puppet interview for 4–11-year-old patients) and FoP (Fear-of-Progression-Questionnaire for 7–18-year-old patients and parents). Patients also completed the KINDL-R to measure HRQoL. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were calculated.

Results

In acute treatment, patient’s perceptions of symptoms and cyclicity of their illness explained variation in their HRQoL in addition to sociodemographic and medical variables. In follow-up care, patient’s FoP and parent’s perception of consequences explained additional variation in patient’s HRQoL. Overall, sociodemographic and medical variables explained less variation in HRQoL in follow-up care than in acute treatment.

Conclusions

Our results stress the importance of psychological factors for the well-being of paediatric cancer patients, particularly in follow-up care, where sociodemographic and medical variables play a lesser role. We recommend screening for illness perceptions and FoP during and after acute treatment to support patients and parents. Furthermore, standardized interventions focussed on changing maladaptive illness perceptions should be developed and evaluated. As parents’ perceptions, thoughts, and feelings may also play an important role for the well-being of the patients, interventions should be family-focussed and include parents.

Trial registration The study has been pre-registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (registered 30/06/2020; DRKS00022034) and at the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/3uwrx).

Peer Review reports

Background

Every year, approximately one in 400 children in Germany is diagnosed with cancer [1]. In the last decades, treatment options have improved significantly, leading to increased survival rates of 82% for any cancer diagnosis, and even 90% for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia [1]. Despite improved prognosis, many paediatric patients and their families report poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL) both during and after acute treatment [2,3,4,5,6,7], that cannot be explained completely by medical variables such as diagnosis or treatment.

Cognitive variables may be associated with HRQoL and are crucial to be considered in psychosocial interventions. Among such variables are individual perceptions and emotions associated with the illness: According to the Common-Sense Model of Illness Representation (CSM) [8], these so-called illness perceptions are cognitive representations of a perceived health threat, e.g., a cancer diagnosis. They are based on available information (e.g., conversations with others, information by medical staff, own experience) and launch a self-regulation process which aims to overcome the health threat. Illness perceptions comprise several dimensions: Perceptions on physical symptoms associated with the illness, expected timeline, causes, consequences, controllability and curability, and illness-related emotions [9]. Recent evidence suggests that illness perceptions explain a substantial proportion of variance in HRQoL in both adult and adolescent patients with chronic illness [10,11,12,13,14]. This effect has also been shown in adult cancer survivors [15,16,17], indicating that the association between illness perceptions and HRQoL persists even until after acute treatment.

Another important variable that has been shown to be associated with HRQoL is fear of progression (FoP). FoP is among the most commonly experienced psychological burdens in acute treatment and follow-up care for adult cancer patients [18] and is defined as the fear that the illness will progress, spread, or recur [19]. It is a rational response to a realistic life-threatening illness and therefore has to be distinguished from neurotic anxiety disorders. Nevertheless, FoP may range from functional (e.g., thereby retaining treatment compliance) to dysfunctional levels. Dysfunctional levels have been shown to be associated with lowered HRQoL both in child and adult cancer patients during acute treatment [20, 21], in adult cancer survivors [22, 23], and in parents of childhood cancer survivors [24].

The CSM poses that, apart from personal experience with the illness, patient’s illness perceptions are also shaped through interaction with significant others. Studies on adult cancer patients found that carer’s/spouse’s illness perceptions are significantly associated with patient’s HRQoL, anxiety, or depression [25, 26]. Similar results have been found in adult oesophageal cancer survivors and their carers [16]. Similarly, parental FoP may inhibit interactions between the parent and their cancer-sick child, as well as family functioning through the transference of anxiety, as has been indicated in an expert survey with professionals in paediatric oncology [27].

Research in paediatric oncology has already demonstrated the relevance of sociodemographic and medical variables on illness perceptions, fear of progression, and HRQoL: Child’s age and gender are often identified as important sociodemographic correlates [28,29,30], while diagnosis, time since diagnosis, and treatment modality have been identified as important medical variables [6, 28, 29, 31].

This paper aims to examine the following research question: To what extent do child’s and parent’s illness perceptions and FoP predict child’s HRQoL in acute treatment and follow-up care, when controlling for sociodemographic and medical variables? We hypothesize that even after controlling for sociodemographic and medical variables, child’s and parent’s illness perceptions and their FoP predict child’s HRQoL in a hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Analyses will be performed separately by treatment stage (acute treatment and follow-up care).

Methods

Design and procedure

This is an observational cross-sectional study. Participants in acute treatment were recruited in the acute wards for paediatric oncology at the university hospitals in Dresden and Leipzig, Germany. Participants in follow-up care were recruited in the parents’ associations in Dresden and Leipzig (Sonnenstrahl e.V. Dresden, Elternhilfe e.V. Leipzig). One parent was also invited to participate. Inclusion criteria were (1) cancer patients aged 4–18 years and one parent, (2) in acute treatment: first diagnosis ≥ 1 month ago, (3) in follow-up care: first diagnosis ≥ 2 years ago; being off active treatment. Exclusion criteria were (1) inability to understand questionnaire/puppet interview, (2) lack of German language knowledge, (3) palliative care.

Children and parents completed measures of HRQoL, illness perceptions, and FoP. Information on sociodemographic and medical characteristics of the child was obtained from the parent.

The study has been pre-registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (registered 30/06/2020; DRKS00022034) and at the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/3uwrx).

Participants

Overall, n = 229 families were eligible for inclusion and informed by our staff about the study. Of those, n = 198 (86%) families wished to participate (Fig. 1). To be included into analysis, data from both child (including the dependent variable child’s HRQoL) and parent had to be available.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow chart on participation

Full size image

In total, n = 46 child-parent dyads in acute treatment and n = 84 child-parent dyads in follow-up care were available for this study. Sociodemographic and illness characteristics are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 Sample characteristics
Full size table

Measures

KINDL-R

The KINDL-R [30] was used to ask all children about their own HRQoL during the past week (e.g., “In the past week, I felt anxious or insecure.”). The questionnaire consists of seven dimensions: (1) Physical well-being, (2) emotional well-being, (3) self-esteem, (4) family, (5) friends, (6) daily functioning (school or pre-school/nursery school), and (7) illness. The items are measured on five-point Likert-scales ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always), except for the version for 4–6-year-old children (Kiddy-KINDL-R), which consists of a three-point Likert scale. The score for HRQoL is calculated by taking the mean of the items following any reverse scoring. For the present study, all scores were transformed to values between 0 to 100 as specified by the manual: Score100 = ([sum score – 24]/96)*100 [32].Higher scores indicate higher HRQoL [30]. The KINDL-R shows acceptable to good internal consistency and high convergent and discriminant validity [33, 34]. In the present study internal consistency for the KINDL-R version for 7–18-year-olds was good (α = 0.85), while Cronbach’s Alpha for the Kiddy-KINDL-R could not be calculated due to too much missing data.

Illness perception questionnaire–revised (IPQ-R)

Illness perceptions of children and parents were assessed using the German IPQ-R [35], which consists of seven dimensions, relative to the CSM: Identity (symptom attribution), timeline-acute/chronic (duration), timeline-cyclical (perceived trajectory as constant or cyclical), personal control (patient’s influence over the illness), illness coherence (comprehension of the illness), consequences (impact of the illness on their life), and emotional representations (emotional impact). The IPQ-R assesses the symptom-dimension with 14 dichotomous items (yes/no) and the other dimensions with 18 items (3 items per dimension) on a five-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The dimension scores are calculated by summing the items after reverse scoring [36]. Higher scores indicate more associated symptoms, more negative perception of chronicity, cyclicity, and emotional representations, and more positive perception of personal control and illness coherence.

Parents and 12–18-year-old children completed the IPQ-R questionnaire. Parents were asked about their own perceptions regarding their child’s illness (e.g., “I get depressed when I think about my child’s illness”). 12–18-year-olds were given a paper–pencil questionnaire similar to the parent’s version (e.g., “I get depressed when I think about my illness”). 4–11-year-old children were examined using an age-adapted hand puppet interview containing the IPQ-R questions [37, 38]. This allowed us to investigate illness perceptions in children and their parents using the same items. For the puppet interview, the IPQ-R items have been dichotomized and two hand puppets tell the child about their opposing views of their own illness (e.g., “I am sad because of my illness.” vs. “I am not sad…”). The child then decides which puppet’s view corresponds with his/her own perception. It could be argued that the questionnaire and the puppet interview do not measure the exact same construct. However, the puppet interview is a state-of-the-art approach to conduct assessments in young children [39], and the items of the IPQ-R were carefully age-adapted, retaining their meaning. The puppet interview showed acceptable validity, comprehensibility, and feasibility in two samples of n = 11 children (pilot study) and n = 64 children in acute treatment and follow-up care [37, 38].

For the present analysis, scores for the 12–18-year-old children’s IPQ-R were dichotomized (except symptoms-dimension; 0 = scores 1 [strongly disagree] to 3 [neither disagree nor agree]; 1 = scores 4 [agree] and 5 [strongly agree]) to match the scale format of the IPQ-R-Puppet scores, yielding a consistent IPQ-R scale for all children. Previous studies showed sufficient internal consistency (except timeline-cyclical) [35], test–retest-reliability (except timeline-cyclical) [36], and construct validity [38] of the IPQ-R. In the present study, internal consistency for the parental IPQ-R dimensions except timeline-cyclical and coherence was acceptable [40] (Cronbach’s alpha: αtimeline-acute/chronic = 0.715, αtimeline cyclical = 0.454, αconsequences = 0.732, αpersonal control = 0.680, αcoherence = 0.606, αemotional representations = 0.794). Internal consistency of child’s dichotomous IPQ-R dimensions was acceptable for the dimensions timeline-acute/chronic and emotional representations (Kuder-Richardson-20 formula: αtimeline-acute/chronic = 0.707, αtimeline cyclical = 0.244, αconsequences = 0.450, αpersonal control = 0.543, αcoherence = 0.618, αemotional representations = 0.656).

Fear of progression questionnaire–revised (FoP-Q)

All parents completed the German adaptation of the FoP-Q-SF for parents (FoP-Q-SF/P) [41]. Children from the age of 7 years completed the adaption for children (FoP-Q-SF/C) [20]. The FoP-Q measures FoP with 12 items on a five-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (very often). Children and parents were asked about their own FoP, respectively (e.g., “I become anxious when I think that my child's disease may progress.” vs. “I become anxious when I think that my illness may progress.”). The FoP score is calculated by summing the items. Higher scores indicate greater FoP. The FoP-Q-SF/P and FoP-Q-SF/C showed good internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity [20, 41]. In the present study internal consistency for the FoP-Q-SF/P (α = 0.90) and FoP-Q-SF/C (α = 0.88) was good.

Statistical analysis

Analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 27.0 [42].

Imputation of missing values for independent variables

Across cases in acute treatment, 1.45% of independent variable values (child’s and parent’s illness perceptions, child’s and parent’s FoP) were missing. In 69.57% of cases, all values were available. Across cases in follow-up care, 1.84% of variable values were missing, while all values were available in 78.05% of cases. Little’s test showed that values of the independent variables were completely missing at random (MCAR), Χ2(90) = 87.071, p = 0.568. Therefore, missing values for the independent variables were imputed using multiple imputation with m = 5 imputations (linear regression model), and the pooled imputed data was used for the analyses described below [43].

Associations between dependent and independent variables

Independent t-tests, one-way independent ANOVA, Kendall-Tau correlations, and pointbiserial correlations were conducted to investigate associations between sociodemographic (child’s age, gender), medical variables (diagnosis, time since diagnosis, treatment modality), and child’s and parent’s illness perceptions and FoP with the child’s HRQoL. The analyses were run separately by stage of medical treatment (acute treatment, follow-up care).

Hierarchical multiple regression analyses

To investigate if child’s and parent’s illness perceptions and FoP predict child’s HRQoL, two hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted (separately by stage of treatment). Important sociodemographic and medical variables (child’s age, diagnosis [dummy coded, reference category: leukaemia], time since diagnosis) were entered first to control for their potential influence. In the second step, only those independent variables (illness perceptions, FoP) that were found to be significantly associated with HRQoL were entered.

Assumptions for hierarchical multiple regression analyses were examined before interpretation of results: Residuals of the dependent variable (child’s HRQoL) were examined for normal distribution (histogram, Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, Shapiro–Wilk test) and homoscedasticity (White test), and the data was examined for linearity of association between the independent variables and the dependent variable (partial regression diagrams), multicollinearity, and outliers (studentized deleted residuals, Cook’s distances, leverages).

For all tests p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Descriptives

Descriptive results of IPQ-R, FoP-Q-SF, and KINDL-R, and correlations between them are summarized in the Additional file 1, Additional file 2 and Additional file 3.

Associations of sociodemographic and medical characteristics with HRQoL

Child’s HRQoL correlated significantly with their age during acute treatment (rτ = − 0.275, p = 0.009) and follow-up care (rτ = − 0.277, p < 0.001), with younger children reporting higher HRQoL. Gender was not significantly associated with HRQoL in acute treatment (rpb = 0.064, p = 0.673) and follow-up care (rpb = − 0.126, p = 0.256).

One-way ANOVAs showed that diagnosis was not significantly associated with HRQoL in patients in acute treatment (F(3,42) = 2.357, p = 0.085) and follow-up care (F(3,80) = 0.164, p = 0.920).

Longer time since cancer diagnosis was significantly correlated with lower HRQoL in follow-up care (rτ = − 0.229, p = 0.002), but not in acute treatment (rτ = 0.174, p = 0.107).

Among patients in acute treatment, there was no significant difference in HRQoL between patients receiving only one modality of treatment and those receiving more than one modality of treatment, t(44) = − 1.547, p = 0.129. In follow-up care, patients who had received only one modality of treatment reported higher HRQoL (M = 78.13, SD = 11.54) than patients who had received more than one modality of treatment (M = 71.88, SD = 14.27), t(82) = 2.222, p = 0.029.

Associations of illness perceptions and FoP with HRQoL

Table 2 shows correlations between illness perceptions and FoP with HRQoL. In acute treatment, child’s perception of associated symptoms and cyclical trajectory, as well as parent’s perception of associated symptoms and chronicity were significantly associated with HRQoL. In follow-up care, child’s perception of associated symptoms, parent’s perception of consequences, and child’s FoP were significantly associated with HRQoL.

Table 2 Kendall-Tau correlations (rτ, p) of illness perceptions and FoP with HRQoL, by stage of medical treatment
Full size table

Hierarchical multiple regression analyses

Acute treatment

Table 3 shows regression and determinant coefficients for each step of the hierarchical multiple regression analysis.

Table 3 Hierarchical multiple regression analysis for the outcome child’s HRQoL in acute treatment (n = 46)†
Full size table

All assumptions for a hierarchical multiple regression analysis were met (see Additional file 4).

Admitting sociodemographic and medical variables (child’s age, diagnosis, time since diagnosis) into the model explained 40.1% of variance in child’s HRQoL, F(5,40) = 5.363, p < 0.001. Introducing child’s perceptions of associated symptoms and cyclicity to the model explained an additional 9.7% of variation in child’s HRQoL. This change in R2 was significant, F(2,38) = 3.643, p = 0.036. Introducing parent’s perceptions of associated symptoms and chronicity in the third step did not significantly explain additional variation in child’s HRQoL, ΔR2 = 0.064, F(2,36) = 1.718, p = 0.194. The regression model after step 2 yielded the following regression coefficients: Children with longer intervals from diagnosis to interview reported higher HRQoL (B = 0.271), and children with higher perception of cyclical trajectory reported lower HRQoL (B = − 4.563).

Follow-up care

Table 4 shows regression and determinant coefficients for each step of the hierarchical multiple regression analysis.

Table 4 Hierarchical multiple regression analysis for the outcome child’s HRQoL in follow-up care (n = 84)
Full size table

All assumptions for a hierarchical multiple regression analysis were met (see Additional file 5).

Admitting sociodemographic and medical variables (age, diagnosis, time since diagnosis) into the model explained 22.0% of variance in child’s HRQoL, F(5,78) = 4.406, p = 0.001. Introducing child’s perceptions of associated symptoms explained an additional 6.0% of variation in child’s HRQoL. This change in R2 was significant, F(6,3099.40) = 4.886, p < 0.001. Introducing child’s FoP in the third step explained an additional 7.0% of variation, F(7,767.49) = 5.563, p < 0.001. Introducing parent’s perceptions of consequences (in the last step explained another 7.0% of variation in child’s HRQoL, F(7,678.48) = 6.343, p < 0.001. The final regression model yielded the following regression coefficients: Younger children reported higher HRQoL (B = − 0.966), children with higher FoP reported lower HRQoL (B = − 0.361), and children whose parents perceived more negative consequences of the illness reported lower HRQoL (B = − 1.269).

Discussion

Research in the last decades has emphasized the need to investigate the role of psychological constructs such as illness perceptions and fear of progression for HRQoL in patients with chronic illness, as these constructs may contribute to HRQoL in addition to medical factors such as the diagnosis. In paediatric oncology, the cancer diagnosis affects the whole family. Therefore, not only the child’s perceptions and emotions may play a role in their HRQoL, but also those of their caregivers [44].

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that investigates the role of child’s and parent’s illness perceptions and fear of progression for child’s HRQoL in paediatric oncological acute treatment and follow-up care. Main results of the study were: (1) In acute treatment, child’s perception of associated symptoms and cyclicity of their illness explained additional variance in child’s HRQoL in addition to sociodemographic and medical variables. (2) In follow-up care, child’s FoP and parent’s perception of consequences explained additional variance in child’s HRQoL. (3) Sociodemographic and medical variables explained less variation of HRQoL in follow-up care, compared to acute treatment.

In our sample in acute treatment, sociodemographic and medical variables explained a total of 40.1% variation in the child’s HRQoL: Specifically, younger age and longer time since diagnosis predicted higher HRQoL in this first step. Adding child’s illness perceptions (associated symptoms, perception of cyclical trajectory) to the model explained an additional 9.7% of variation, leading to a total of 49.8% of explained variation in HRQoL, with longer time since diagnosis and the perception of a less cyclical illness trajectory predicting higher HRQoL. Parental perceptions or child’s and parent’s FoP were not significantly associated with HRQoL and did not play a significant role in the explanation of variation in HRQoL. Our findings are in line with previous research on adult cancer patients [11], adolescents with sickle cell disease [12] or inflammatory bowel disease [10], and children with cancer [13] or spinal muscular atrophy [14]. These studies found that, after controlling for medical and sociodemographic variables, illness perceptions were significant predictors of the patient’s HRQoL. Some of the authors also examined specific illness perception dimensions: Fonseca and colleagues [13] found that the perception of negative consequences was the strongest predictor for HRQoL in 8–12-year-old cancer patients, with the perception of associated symptoms, concerns, coherence, and perceived chronicity also explaining a significant amount of variation. Scharloo and colleagues [11] found that, after controlling for age and comorbidity, increased attention to symptoms was associated with lower self-reported emotional and physical functioning, as well as lower self-reported global health, and perception of a cyclical trajectory was associated with lower self-reported role functioning and cognitive functioning in adult head and neck cancer patients.

In follow-up care, the child’s age explained a total of 22.0% of variation in their HRQoL, with diagnosis and time since diagnosis not being significant predictors of HRQoL. In the next regression steps, child’s perception of associated symptoms, child’s FoP, and parent’s perception of negative consequences each contributed to the variation in HRQoL. In the final model, regression coefficients for the variables age, child’s FoP, and parent’s perception of negative consequences were significant, with younger age, lower FoP in the child, and less negative parental perception of consequences predicting higher HRQoL. Our findings relate to previous research on cancer survivors [15,16,17]: Specifically, Schoormans and colleagues [15] found that the perception of negative consequences, higher perception of treatment control, higher perception of associated symptoms, and more negative emotional representations were associated with lower HRQoL in the survivor. Dempster and colleagues [16] investigated survivor’s and their carer’s perceptions. After controlling for sociodemographic and medical variables, they found that the survivor’s perceptions of negative consequences, personal control, and coherence, as well as the carer’s perception of consequences and treatment control contributed to the survivor’s anxiety and depression.

Results between the samples in acute treatment and follow-up care differed substantially: Sociodemographic and medical variables in the follow-up care sample explained much less variation in HRQoL compared to the sample in acute treatment (22.0% compared to 40.1%). Concerning psychological factors, in acute treatment only the child’s perception of symptoms was significantly associated with HRQoL, whereas in follow-up care, parental illness perceptions and child’s FoP became important predictors for child’s HRQoL. It seems that during acute treatment, side effects (e.g., nausea, pain) play a major role in the child’s daily life and therefore are vital contributing factors to their HRQoL. In follow-up care, on the other hand, the illness becomes less relevant, whereas psychological factors such as FoP and parent’s illness perceptions become more important to the child’s HRQoL. For example, child’s FoP may not be an important factor in acute treatment because children focus on their daily life in the clinic and not on potential consequences and long-term effects of their illness. Children in follow-up care, on the other hand, may perceive FoP as they survey the health threat retrospectively and have already been confronted with its consequences and long-term effects. Similarly, parental perception of illness consequences predicts their child’s HRQoL in follow-up care only, potentially because children and parents communicate about their perceptions and fears.

Study limitations

We investigated n = 46 child-parent-dyads in acute treatment and n = 84 dyads in follow-up care, with the children’s age ranging from 4 to 18 years. To our knowledge, this is the first study that includes children from such a young age both during acute cancer treatment and follow-up care. However, the sample size for the regression analysis in acute treatment was too small, as we included nine predictors into the model. In follow-up care, following the suggestion of Harris [45] to have at least ten cases per predictor, the sample size was sufficient. When interpreting the results from the acute treatment sample, the sample size needs to be kept in mind. Nevertheless, our findings contribute to the field of research and should be explored with sufficient sample sizes in the future.

Internal consistency of some dimensions was low in the IPQ-R puppet interview. Potential reasons might be: (a) The low number of items per dimensions (Cronbach’s alpha gets higher the more items are included) [40], and/ or (b) the dichotomous response format that allows only for two opposite responses (lower interrelatedness of the items [40]). Especially young children might be undecided on particular dimensions because in this age there is no coherent concept for the dimensions. Further studies are needed for replication of the results and to explore potential age effects in response patterns on illness perceptions. Nevertheless, despite low internal consistency of selected dimensions, the use of the IPQ-R as a dichotomous puppet interview is still desirable as it enables the user to compare illness perceptions between young children, adolescents, and parents.

As our study was cross-sectional, it could be argued that illness perceptions or FoP are fostered by lower HRQoL, and not the other way round, as we hypothesized. Our future analyses of the longitudinal data will clarify causal relationships between the variables.

Clinical implications

Our results stress the importance of psychological factors for the well-being of children suffering from cancer. As medical factors and daily stressors (such as symptom perception) are main influencing factors on HRQoL in acute treatment, this stresses the importance of supportive therapies to improve daily coping and activate individual resources. The importance of psychological factors becomes even more pronounced in follow-up care, where sociodemographic and medical variables play a lesser role. We recommend screening for maladaptive illness perceptions and FoP in children and parents during and after acute treatment as they may influence the child’s HRQoL. This can be done using well-established instruments for the measurement of illness perceptions (IPQ-R as questionnaire or puppet interview for younger children) and FoP (FoP-Q-SF). The association between these factors and the child’s HRQoL imply that interventions focussing on changing maladaptive illness perceptions or high FoP might improve the child’s HRQoL. Effective interventions for adult patients already exist. However, there is a need to develop interventions for paediatric patients. It needs to be kept in mind that in paediatric oncology, not only the child’s perceptions, but also the parent’s perceptions, thoughts, and feelings may play an important role in the well-being of the child. Therefore, interventions should be family-focussed and include parental views and fears concerning their child’s illness.

Availability of data and materials

The data and materials that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author (KH) upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

CSM:

Common Sense Model of Illness Representation

DRKS:

Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (German Clinical Trials Register)

FoP:

Fear of progression

FoP-Q:

Fear of Progression Questionnaire

FoP-Q-SF/P:

Fear of progression questionnaire–short form–version for parents

FoP-Q-SF/C:

Fear of progression questionnaire–short form–version for children

HRQoL:

Health-related quality of life

IPQ-R:

Illness perception questionnaire–revised

References

  1. Erdmann F, Kaatsch P, Grabow D, Spix C. German childhood cancer registry—annual report 2019 (1980–2018). Institute of medical biostatistics, epidemiology and informatics (IMBEI) at the University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz. 2020.

  2. Calaminus G, Weinspach S, Teske C, Göbel U. Quality of survival in children and adolescents after treatment for childhood cancer: the influence of reported late effects on health-related quality of life. Klin Padiatr. 2007;219(3):152–7. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-973846.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Furlong W, Rae C, Feeny D, Gelber RD, Laverdiere C, Michon B, Silverman L, Sallan S, Barr R. Health-related quality of life among children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2012;59(4):717–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.24096.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Houtzager BA, Grootenhuis MA, Hoekstra-Weebers JEHM, Last BF. One month after diagnosis: quality of life, coping and previous functioning in siblings of children with cancer. Child Care Health Develop. 2005;31(1):75–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2005.00459.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Litzelman K, Catrine K, Gangnon R, Witt WP. Quality of life among parents of children with cancer or brain tumors: the impact of child characteristics and parental psychosocial factors. Qual Life Res. 2011;20(8):1261–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9854-2.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Varni JW, Limbers CA, Burwinkle TM. Impaired health-related quality of life in children and adolescents with chronic conditions: a comparative analysis of 10 disease clusters and 33 disease categories/severities utilizing the PedsQLTM 4.0 generic core scales. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007;5(1):43. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-5-43.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zeltzer LK, Lu Q, Leisenring W, Tsao JCI, Recklitis C, Armstrong G, Mertens AC, Robison LL, Ness KK. Psychosocial outcomes and health-related quality of life in adult childhood cancer survivors: a report from the childhood cancer survivor study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2008;17(2):435–46. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Leventhal H, Meyer D, Nerenz D. The common sense representation of illness danger. Contrib Med Psychol. 1980;2:7–30.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Leventhal H, Phillips LA, Burns E. The common-sense model of self-regulation (CSM): a dynamic framework for understanding illness self-management. J Behav Med. 2016;39(6):935–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-016-9782-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stapersma L, van den Brink G, van der Ende J, Bodelier AG, van Wering HM, Hurkmans PCWM, Mearin ML, van der Meulen De Jong AE, Escher JC, Utens EMWJ. Illness perceptions and depression are associated with health-related quality of life in youth with inflammatory bowel disease. Int J Behav Med. 2019;26(4):415–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-019-09791-6.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Scharloo M, Baatenburg de Jong RJ, Langeveld TP, van Velzen-Verkaik E, Doorn-op den Akker MM, Kaptein AA. Quality of life and illness perceptions in patients with recently diagnosed head and neck cancer. Head Neck J Sci Spec Head Neck. 2005;27(10):857–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Asnani MR, Barton-Gooden A, Grindley M, Knight-Madden J. Disease knowledge, illness perceptions, and quality of life in adolescents with sickle cell disease: is there a link? Global Pediatric Health. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333794X17739194.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fonseca M, Missotten P, Etienne A-M, Dupuis G, Lemétayer F, Spitz E. The impact of children’s illness perceptions on paediatric cancer patients’ quality of life. Psychooncology. 2010;19(Suppl. 2):126.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fischer MJ, Ketelaar M, van der Veere PJ, Verhoef M, Wadman RI, Visser-Meily JMA, van der Pol WL, Schröder CD. Illness perceptions in pediatric spinal muscular atrophy: agreement between children and their parents, and its association with quality of life. J Dev Phys Disabil. 2021;33:297–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-020-09749-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Schoormans D, Wijnberg L, Haak H, Husson O, Mols F. Negative illness perceptions are related to poorer health-related quality of life among thyroid cancer survivors: results from the PROFILES registry. Head Neck. 2020;42(9):2533–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.26290.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dempster M, McCorry NK, Brennan E, Donnelly M, Murray LJ, Johnston BT. Illness perceptions among carer–survivor dyads are related to psychological distress among oesophageal cancer survivors. J Psychosom Res. 2011;70(5):432–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.07.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. de Rooij BH, Thong MSY, van Roij J, Bonhof CS, Husson O, Ezendam NPM. Optimistic, realistic, and pessimistic illness perceptions, quality of life, and survival among 2457 cancer survivors: the population-based PROFILES registry. Cancer. 2018;124(17):3609–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31634.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Herschbach P, Dankert A, Duran-Atzinger G, Waadt S, Engst-Hastreiter U, Keller M, Henrich G. Diagnostik von Progredienzangst: Entwicklung eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung von Progredienzangst bei Patienten mit Krebserkrankungen, Diabetes mellitus und entzündlich-rheumatischen Erkrankungen in der Rehabilitation. Munich: Institut für Psychosomatische Medizin, medizinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie der TU-München. 2001.

  19. Herschbach P, Dinkel A. Fear of progression. In: U. Goerling (Hrsg.), Psycho-Oncology (Bd. 197, S. 11–29). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40187-9_2.

  20. Luz JK, Martini J, Clever K, Herschbach P, Christiansen H, Schepper F. Psychometric Properties of the Fear of Progression Questionnaire for Children (FoP-Q-SF/C). Klinische Pädiatrie. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1128-0471.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mehnert A, Herschbach P, Berg P, Henrich G, Koch U. Progredienzangst bei Brustkrebspatientinnen—Validierung der Kurzform des Progredienzangstfragebogens PA-F-KF/Fear of progression in breast cancer patients—validation of the short form of the Fear of Progression Questionnaire (FoP-Q-SF). Zeitschrift für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie. 2006;52(3):274–88. https://doi.org/10.13109/zptm.2006.52.3.274.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Simard S, Thewes B, Humphris G, Dixon M, Hayden C, Mireskandari S, Ozakinci G. Fear of cancer recurrence in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review of quantitative studies. J Cancer Surviv. 2013;7(3):300–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-013-0272-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Crist JV, Grunfeld EA. Factors reported to influence fear of recurrence in cancer patients: a systematic review. Psychooncology. 2013;22(5):978–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Peikert ML, Inhestern L, Krauth KA, Escherich G, Rutkowski S, Kandels D, Bergelt C. Fear of progression in parents of childhood cancer survivors: a dyadic data analysis. Psychooncology. 2020;29(10):1678–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5508.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Giannousi Z, Karademas EC, Dimitraki G. Illness representations and psychological adjustment of Greek couples dealing with a recently-diagnosed cancer: dyadic, interaction and perception-dissimilarity effects. J Behav Med. 2016;39(1):85–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Richardson AE, Morton R, Broadbent E. Caregivers’ illness perceptions contribute to quality of life in head and neck cancer patients at diagnosis. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2015;33(4):414–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/07347332.2015.1046011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Clever K, Schepper F, Küpper L, Christiansen H, Martini J. Fear of progression in parents of children with cancer: results of an online expert survey in pediatric oncology. Klinische Pädiatrie. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0586-8921.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Momani TG, Hathaway DK, Mandrell BN. Factors affecting health-related quality of life in children undergoing curative treatment for cancer: a review of the literature. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs. 2016;33(3):228–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043454215609585.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Wu E, Robison LL, Jenney MEM, Rockwood TH, Feusner J, Friedman D, Kane RL, Bhatia S. Assessment of health-related quality of life of adolescent cancer patients using the minneapolis-manchester quality of life adolescent questionnaire. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2007;48(7):678–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.20874.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ravens-Sieberer U, Bullinger M. Assessing health-related quality of life in chronically ill children with the German KINDL: first psychometric and content analytical results. Qual Life Res. 1998;7(5):399–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wang S-Y, Hsu SH, Gross CP, Sanft T, Davidoff AJ, Ma X, Yu JB. Association between time since cancer diagnosis and health-related quality of life: a population-level analysis. Value in Health. 2016;19(5):631–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.02.010.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ravens-Sieberer U, Bullinger M. KINDLR Fragebogen zur Erfassung der gesundheitsbezogenen Lebensqualität bei Kindern und Jugendlichen—Revidierte Form: Manual. 2000.

  33. Ravens-Sieberer U, Görtler E, Bullinger M. Subjektive Gesundheit und Gesundheitsverhalten von Kindern und Jugendlichen—Eine Befragung Hamburger Schüler im Rahmen der schulärztlichen Untersuchung. Das Gesundheitswesen. 2000;62(3):148–55. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2000-10487.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ravens-Sieberer U, Redegeld M, Bullinger M. Lebensqualität chronisch kranker Kinder im Verlauf der statioären Rehabilitation. Verbindung und veränderung im fokus der medizinischen psychologie. Lengerich (Germany): Pabst Science Publishers. 2000;89–91.

  35. Gaab J, Latanzia-Bunschoten S, Sprott H. Illness perception questionnaire. In: Diagnostische Verfahren in der Rehabilitation. Hogrefe; 2008. (S. 109–111). https://edoc.unibas.ch/46455/

  36. Moss-Morris R, Weinman J, Petrie K, Horne R, Cameron L, Buick D. The revised illness perception questionnaire (IPQ-R). Psychol Health. 2002;17(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440290001494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hering C. Master’s Thesis: Im Gespräch mit Puppen: Konstruktion und Validierung eines Verfahrens zur Erhebung subjektiver Krankheitsmodelle pädiatrisch-onkologischer Patienten. University of Leipzig. 2015.

  38. Schepper F, Herzog K, Herrmann J, Martini J. Das Puppeninterview zur Erfassung subjektiver Krankheitsannahmen krebskranker Kinder. Prävention und Gesundheitsförderung. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11553-022-00938-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ablow JC, Measelle JR. Berkeley Puppet Interview: Administration and scoring system manuals. Berkeley: University of California; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Vaske JJ, Beaman J, Sponarski CC. Rethinking internal consistency in Cronbach’s Alpha. Leis Sci. 2017;39(2):163–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2015.1127189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Clever K, Schepper F, Pletschko T, Herschbach P, Christiansen H, Martini J. Psychometric properties of the Fear of Progression Questionnaire for parents of children with cancer (FoP-Q-SF/PR). J Psychosom Res. 2018;107:7–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2018.01.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. IBM Corp. Released. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 27.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. 2020.

  43. Van Buuren S. Flexible imputation of missing data (2. Aufl.). CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. 2018.

  44. Lyons KS, Lee CS. The theory of dyadic illness management. J Fam Nurs. 2018;24(1):8–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074840717745669.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Harris RJ. A primer of multivariate statistics (2. Aufl.). Academic Press. 1985.

  46. van Ginkel JR. Significance tests and estimates for R2 for multiple regression in multiply imputed datasets: a cautionary note on earlier findings, and alternative solutions. Multivar Behav Res. 2019;54(4):514–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2018.1540967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully thank all families who participated in the study and we express our gratitude to all cooperating project partners for supporting the recruitment and the implementation of this study: Elternhilfe e.V. Leipzig, Sonnenstrahl Dresden e.V., Selbständige Abteilung für Pädiatrische Onkologie, Hämatologie und Hämostaseologie of the Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Bereich für Pädiatrische Onkologie und Hämatologie of the Universitätsklinikum Dresden.

Funding

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. This study was supported by the Stiftung Deutsche Krebshilfe under grants DKH-70112444 and 70112467.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Medicine of the Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany

    Kristina Herzog & Julia Martini

  2. Department of Paediatric Oncology, Haematology and Haemostaseology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany

    Kristina Herzog, Florian Schepper & Holger Christiansen

  3. Department of Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Thomas Pletschko

  4. Elternhilfe für krebskranke Kinder e.V. Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany

    Jessy Herrmann

  5. Department of Paediatrics, Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    Mihaela Budich

  6. Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    Meinolf Suttorp

Authors
  1. Kristina Herzog
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Florian Schepper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Pletschko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jessy Herrmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mihaela Budich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Holger Christiansen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Meinolf Suttorp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Julia Martini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

JM and FS conceived and designed the study. KH collected, analysed, and interpreted the data. KH prepared the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristina Herzog.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Technische Universität Dresden (EK-514112015) and the Universität Leipzig (366/14-ff). Written informed consent was obtained from all participating parents for themselves and from all parents and/or legal guardians for the participating underage children. The study has been pre-registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-00022034) and at the Open Science Foundation (https://osf.io/3uwrx).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

All authors declare that they have no financial relationships that might be perceived as a potential conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1

. Descriptive results (M, SD) of IPQ-R, FoP-Q-SF, and KINDL-R, by stage of medical treatment.

Additional file 2

. Correlation matrices of study variables in the acute treatment sample in the original data set and the multiply imputed data set.

Additional file 3

. Correlation matrices of study variables in the follow-up care sample in the original data set and the multiply imputed data set.

Additional file 4

. Assumptions for a hierarchical multiple regression analysis for the acute treatment sample (n=46).

Additional file 5

. Assumptions for a hierarchical multiple regression analysis for the follow-up care sample (n=84).

Additional file 6

. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis for the outcome child’s HRQoL in follow-up care, using the original dataset (n=68).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Herzog, K., Schepper, F., Pletschko, T. et al. Illness perceptions, fear of progression and health-related quality of life during acute treatment and follow-up care in paediatric cancer patients and their parents: a cross-sectional study. BMC Psychol 11, 44 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01078-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01078-6

Keywords

BMC Psychology

ISSN: 2050-7283

Contact us