Gender Differences in Coping, Depression, and Anxiety in Patients with Non-Metastatic Lung Cancer

Figures & data

Figure 1 Flow diagram.

Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of the Patients

Variable		Females	Males	p^(Chi2)
Age group	35–65	13 (72.2%)	11 (50.0%)	0.203^F
	>65	5 (27.8%)	11 (50.0%)
Environment	Rural	6 (33.3%)	7 (31.8%)	1.000^F
	Urban	12 (66.7%)	15 (68.2%)
Study level	High school	10 (55.6%)	10 (45.5%)	0.751^F
	University	8 (44.4%)	12 (54.5%)
Profession	Unemployed	5 (27.8%)	7 (31.8%)	1.000^F
	Retired	13 (72.2%)	15 (68.2%)
Marital status	Married	12 (66.7%)	18 (81.8%)	0.463^Y
	Unmarried	6 (33.3%)	4 (18.2%)

Abbreviations: ^F, Fisher Exact Test; ^Y, Corrected Yate’s.

Table 2 Post-Operative Correlations of Coping Mechanism with PHQ9 and GAD7 Separately in Men and Women

Gender	PHQ9		GAD7
	Pre-Operatory (p=0.861)^y	Post-Operatory (p=0.049)^y*	Pre-Operatory (p=0.697)^y	Post-Operatory (p=0.042)^y*
Male	4.5 (9)	7.5 (8)	4.5 (7)	5.5 (8)
Female	4.0 (6)	3.0 (5)	3.5 (5)	3.0 (5)

Note: y Mann–Whitney U-Test; * significant difference.

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics for 40 Cancer Patients (18 Males, 22 Females)^x

COPE	Spearman Correlation rho Coeff. /p value	Male		Female
		PHQ9	GAD7	PHQ9	GAD7
Positive interpretation and growth	rho	0.182	−0.027	0.322	0.484
	p	0.471	0.917	0.144	0.022*
Mental deactivation	rho	0.702	0.597	0.387	0.342
	p	0.001*	0.009*	0.075	0.119
Expression of feelings	rho	0.467	0.381	0.119	0.291
	p	0.051	0.119	0.598	0.190
Use of the social-instrumental support	rho	0.505	0.454	0.119	0.329
	p	0.033*	0.058	0.599	0.135
Active approach	rho	0.442	0.228	0.457	0.322
	p	0.066	0.363	0.087	0.092
Denial	rho	0.419	0.553	0.465	0.417
	p	0.084	0.017*	0.029*	0.053
Religious approach	rho	0.147	0.086	0.318	0.363
	p	0.560	0.733	0.149	0.097
Humour	rho	0.196	0.333	0.041	−0.084
	p	0.437	0.176	0.855	0.710
Behavioural deactivation	rho	−0.062	0.071	0.562	0.590
	p	0.806	0.779	0.006*	0.004*
Restraint	rho	0.166	0.053	0.280	0.166
	p	0.510	0.833	0.207	0.459
Use of the social-emotional support	rho	0.773	0.755	0.383	0.502
	p	<0.001*	<0.001*	0.078	0.017*
Substance consumption	rho	-	-	−0.166	−0.306
	p	-	-	0.461	0.167
Acceptance	rho	−0.198	−0.296	0.030	0.005
	p	0.431	0.233	0.894	0.982
Deletion of concurrent activities	rho	0.376	0.409	−0.008	0.116
	p	0.082	0.092	0.971	0.608
Planning	rho	0.272	0.049	0.113	0.167
	p	0.274	0.848	0.616	0.459

Notes: ^x Median (Interquartile Range), * - significant correlations.

Table 4 Degree of Use of Coping Mechanisms by Gender^x

COPE	Female	Male	p value^y
Planning	12 (4)	13 (3.25)	0.228
Positive interpretation and growth	12 (2)	12.5 (3)	0.590
Mental deactivation	9 (2.5)	9.5 (3.25)	0.629
Expression of feelings	10 (2.25)	9 (3.5)	0.880
Use of the social-instrumental support	12 (2.25)	12 (3.25)	0.730
Active approach	12 (4)	12 (2)	0.342
Denial	8.5 (4.25)	10 (4.25)	0.093
Religious approach	16 (3.25)	14 (4.25)	0.123
Humour	5.5 (6)	11 (7)	0.009*
Behavioural deactivation	9 (4)	10 (3.75)	0.152
Restraint	9.5 (3)	11 (4)	0.028*
Use of the social-emotional support	10.5 (4.25)	11 (6.5)	0.978
Substance consumption	4 (0)	4 (0)	0.060
Acceptance	12 (4.25)	12.5 (3.5)	0.364
Deletion of concurrent activities	11 (5)	11 (3.25)	0.402

Notes: ^y Mann–Whitney U-Test; * significant difference, ^x Median (Interquartile Range).

Table 5 15 Coping Mechanisms Ordered by Gender and Descending COPE Score

COPE	Male Score	COPE	Female Score
Religious approach	14	Religious approach	16
Planning	13	Positive interpretation and growth	12
Positive interpretation and growth	12.5	Use of social-instrumental support	12
Acceptance	12.5	Active approach	12
Use of the social-instrumental support	12	Acceptance	12
Active approach	12	Planning	12
Humour	11	Deletion of concurrent activities	11
Restraint	11	Use of social-emotional support	10.5
Use of the social-emotional support	11	Expression of feelings	10
Deletion of concurrent activities	11	Restraint	9.5
Denial	10	Mental deactivation	9
Behavioural deactivation	10	Behavioural deactivation	9
Mental deactivation	9.5	Denial	8.5
Expression of feelings	9	Humour	5.5
Substance consumption	4	Substance consumption	4