Introduction: Chronic cancer‐related fatigue (CCRF) is a common symptom among patients. Current therapies target the patient alone, while evidence suggests that targeting the dyad might be more beneficial. Method: Using a mixed methods design, we conducted two studies that together aimed to provide more insight into the needs, benefits, barriers and preferences regarding a couples therapy for CCRF. In a qualitative study, we conducted focus groups and semi‐structured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 patients and 10 partners with experience of CCRF care, followed by thematic analysis. In a subsequent quantitative study, a convenience sample of patients ( n = 172) and partners ( n = 55) completed an online survey developed based on the qualitative findings. Results: In the qualitative study, both patients and partners expressed that a couples therapy could help them. Perceived benefits included empowerment of partners to support patients and improved couples communication. In the online survey, the need for a dyadic approach to CCRF therapy was confirmed by both patients (39%) and partners (91%). The benefits reported by most patients and partners were that partners could get attention for their own problems related to the patients’ cancer and fatigue (patients: 72%, partners: 86%) and receive advice on coping with fatigue (66% and 90%, respectively). Participants in both studies identified barriers, such as a fear of burdening partners with a couples therapy (50%). Partner involvement was considered desirable for most therapy elements (e.g., psychoeducation, contact with the therapist, exercises and relapse prevention). Yet, individual preferences varied widely. Conclusion: Results of both studies support the potential acceptability of a couples therapy for CCRF among patients and partners. Based on divergent preferences, we determined that a couples therapy must provide flexibility regarding the degree, intensity and type of partner involvement. Dyadic psychoeducation can be used as a solid starting point to manage expectations and get relief from perceived barriers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dongen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: