ORIGINAL ARTICLES   

Giornale Italiano di Dermatologia e Venereologia 2011 December;146(6):425-30

Copyright © 2011 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Simultaneous care and melanoma: preliminary report about the psychoncological approach

Campolmi E. ¹, Mugnai F. ¹, Riccio M. ¹, Santosuosso U. ², Saccardi A. ^{3, 4}, Giove S. ^{3, 5}, Fortunato S. ¹, Ribecco A. ⁶, Borgognoni L. ⁷, Pimpinelli N. ¹ ✉

¹ Section of Dermatologic, Preventive and Oncologic Clinic, Department of Medico-Surgical Critical Area, University of Florence, SODc Dermatologic Physiotherapy, Florence Local Health Unit, Florence, Italy; ² Department of Human Anatomy, Histology and Forensic Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; ³ FILE, Fondazione Italiana Leniterapia, Florence, Italy; ⁴ Mugello Unit of Palliative Care, University of Florence, SODc Dermatologic Physiotherapy, Florence Local Health Unit, Florence, Italy; ⁵ Unit of Palliative Care, Florence, Florence Local Health Unit, Florence, Italy; ⁶ Unit of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, Santa Maria Annunziata Hospital, Florence Local Health Unit, Florence, Italy; ⁷ Unit of Plastic Surgery, Santa Maria Annunziata Hospital, Florence Local Health Unit, Melanoma Center, Tuscany Region, Florence, Italy

AIM. The main aim of the study was to investigate the efficacy of a “take-in- charge” model of advanced stage melanoma patients by a multidisciplinary team and highlight the psychological patterns of the disease.
METHODS: The study sample involved 44 patients, 27 females and 17 males, who were given a “Questionnaire on Health Status SF-12” which provides two synthetic indexes, one related to physical health PCS-12, and the other to mental health MCS-12. The statistical data was collected through a preliminary analysis of principal components P.C. A., carried out with SPSS software.
RESULTS:Comparing the scores obtained by the PCS and MCS indexes, the mean score is low: 6.52 out of 10 for PCS and 3.23 out of 10 for MCS. At first consultation, there is evidence which supports patients’ need for psycho-oncological support. By dividing the sample patients into two subgroups, cutaneous melanoma and visceral melanoma, it should be noted that the first group obtained a mean of 4.75 for PCS and 3.77 for MCS and the second group 7.53 for PCS and 2.92 for MCS respectively. Therefore, the results show, at first consultation, a more complex situation for patients with cutaneous melanoma.
CONCLUSION: The results of the study highlight the need to supply some form of psycho-oncological support to help patients while they adapt to the disease. Furthermore, different problems and different coping styles also emerged depending on whether the patient has cutaneous or visceral melanoma. The study therefore demonstrates the need to take into account such variables when devising a personal care system centered on the patient.