Evaluación de un Modelo de Intervención Psicooncológica en el Peridiagnóstico en pacientes adultos. Resultados Finales

Introduction: The characteristic uncertainty of the peri-diagnostic phase of cancer is associated with high Emotional Activation (AE), which may hinder the development of an accurate Illness Representation (RE) and compromise initial adjustment. Despite its clinical relevance, there remains a shortage of brief, manualized interventions that have been evaluated with methodological rigor. Objective: To evaluate the effects of the Peri-diagnostic Psycho-Oncological Intervention Model (MIPP), a focused four-session individual protocol designed to reduce AE and facilitate the updating of RE. Method: A quasi-experimental study was conducted with 80 adult patients with a first diagnosis of stage I-III cancer. Participants were assessed within the week following their initial consultation at the Oncology Service of Santamarina Hospital (Tandil, Argentina) and were assigned to the intervention (MIPP) or control group by consecutive alternation. AE was assessed using the DASS-21, RE using the BIPQ, and adjustment to cancer using the mini-MAC, at day 1 (pre) and day 30 (post). Between-group comparisons of POST scores, between-group analyses of individual POST-PRE change, within-group analyses, and the Reliable Change Index (RCI) were performed. Results: Between-group comparisons of POST scores showed statistically significant differences in Depression, Anxiety, Stress, Cognitive Illness Representation, Emotional Illness Representation, and Anxious Preoccupation (p ≤ 0.002; effect sizes = 0.834–1.092), as well as in Hopelessness (p = 0.009; effect size = 0.573). A statistically significant difference was also observed in Cognitive Avoidance (p = 0.042; effect size = 0.419), although this finding was not replicated in the between-group analysis of individual POST-PRE change (p = 0.118). Within-group analyses showed large-magnitude changes in the intervention group for AE, RE, Hopelessness, and Anxious Preoccupation. The RCI showed that, depending on the scale considered, 94% to 100% of intervention-group patients with moderate or higher baseline symptom levels achieved recovery or clinically significant improvement. Conclusion: These findings provide promising preliminary evidence regarding the potential usefulness of the MIPP as a brief intervention during the peri-diagnostic phase of cancer. Replication in multicenter studies with longitudinal follow-up is needed to more precisely establish the consistency and maintenance of its effects on patients’ initial adjustment.