Anxiety and hopelessness levels related to climate change in oncology patients

Le résumé fourni par la source

Aims: Anxiety related to an uncertain and changing natural environment is defined as climate change anxiety. Oncology patients may experience the effects of climate change both directly and indirectly, which can negatively impact their mental well-being. According to Beck’s Cognitive Model, persistent exposure to stressors, such as climate change-related disruptions, may lead to negative automatic thoughts, reinforcing feelings of anxiety and hopelessness. This theoretical framework supports the exploration of the relationship between climate change anxiety and hopelessness. This study aimed to examine the relationship between climate change anxiety, conceptualized as a secondary stressor, and hopelessness among patients receiving oncology treatment, as well as to identify sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with hopelessness. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted with 203 patients undergoing treatment in an oncology clinic. Patients' anxiety regarding climate change and hopelessness levels were assessed using the Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS) and the Climate Change Anxiety Scale (CCAS). The study was reported in accordance with the STROBE checklist. Results: Sixty-four percent of the participants were between the ages of 45 and 59, with the majority being women. Climate change anxiety and hopelessness levels were found to be moderate. According to the hierarchical regression analysis, the duration of cancer treatment were significant predictors of hopelessness. Additionally, when climate change anxiety was included in the model, the explanatory power increased . This finding suggests that higher climate anxiety is associated with an increase in hopelessness levels. Conclusion: The findings indicate that when climate change anxiety is conceptualized as a secondary contextual stressor, it is associated with hopelessness in oncology patients; however, its relative impact remains limited compared to cancer-related factors. These results underscore the importance of considering broader environmental concerns as part of the psychological context influencing emotional well-being in clinical populations.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.