Mindfulness and Tai Chi for Sleep, Fatigue, and Pain in Distressed People After Cancer Treatment: A Partially Randomized Patient-Preference Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR) and Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ) are beneficial for these conditions, but have not been studied together.

以正念为基础的癌症康复（MBCR）和太极/气功（TCQ）对这些状况有益，但尚未一起研究。

The Mindfulness and Tai Chi for Cancer Health (MATCH) study was designed to incorporate innovative design features, including patient choice, while evaluating two interventions for distressed cancer survivors with predefined secondary outcomes, including sleep, fatigue, and pain.

正念和太极癌症健康（MATCH）研究被设计来结合创新的设计特点，包括患者选择，同时评估两种干预措施对有困扰的癌症幸存者的影响，包括预定义的次要结果，如睡眠、疲劳和疼痛。

Methods

Participants chose one of the two interventions or chose to be randomly assigned into either intervention, then were further randomly assigned into immediate intervention or waitlist groups.

参与者选择两种干预措施中的一种，或者选择被随机分配到任一干预措施，然后被进一步随机分配到立即干预或等待列表组。

We evaluated the efficacy of MBCR and TCQ, whether participants' choices affected intervention effects, and correlations among changes in sleep, fatigue, and pain.

我们评估了MBCR和TCQ的有效性，参与者的选择是否影响了干预效果，以及睡眠、疲劳和疼痛的变化之间的相关性。

Results

Participants (N = 587) were on average 60.7 years, with multiple types and stages of cancer.

参与者（N = 587）平均年龄为60.7岁，患有多种类型和阶段的癌症。

At postintervention, compared with waitlist controls, the TCQ group had an average improvement of 1.9 points on the sleep quality scale, which remained statistically significant compared with controls after adjustment for age, sex, cancer stage, and preference (P = .004).

在干预后，与等待列表对照组相比，TCQ组在睡眠质量量表上的平均改善为1.9分，与对照组相比在调整年龄、性别、癌症阶段和偏好后仍然具有统计学意义（P = .004）。

Compared with waitlist controls, both MBCR and TCQ groups had significantly improved fatigue with mean improvements of 3.66 and 3.42 points, respectively (MBCR: P = .036.

与等待列表对照组相比，MBCR和TCQ组的疲劳显著改善，平均改善分别为3.66和3.42分（MBCR：P = .036）。

TCQ: P = .043) and over 1 point of change on pain interference (MBCR: P = .029.

TCQ: P = .043) 以及在疼痛干扰上超过1点的变化 (MBCR: P = .029)。

TCQ: P = .002).

TCQ: P = .002)。

MBCR and TCQ did not differ from one another.

MBCR和TCQ之间没有差异。

Preference status did not affect outcomes.

偏好状态并未影响结果。

Significant correlations were observed among changes in sleep, fatigue, and pain interference, suggesting mild to moderate associations.

在睡眠、疲劳和疼痛干扰的变化中观察到显著的相关性，表明了轻度到中度的关联。

Conclusions

Compared with waitlist controls, MBCR and TCQ both improved fatigue and pain interference at post-intervention, and TCQ also improved sleep quality.

与等待名单对照组相比，MBCR和TCQ在干预后都改善了疲劳和疼痛干扰，TCQ还改善了睡眠质量。

Correlations across outcomes highlight the importance of addressing clusters of cancer symptoms within a whole-person health framework.

结果之间的相关性突显了在整体健康框架内解决癌症症状群的重要性。