From Treating to Preventing Distress through Psychological Prehabilitation – A Novel Theoretical Framework
Abstract
Background: In cancer prehabilitation, physical components predominate and psychological preparation is often overlooked. Yet up to half of patients develop distress during treatment, which undermines adherence, recovery, and quality of life. Psychological care remains largely reactive and lacks a unifying theoretical framework for prevention. Preventing distress poses three challenges: building resilience; doing so before patients have experienced treatment stressors; and tailoring this to each patient.
Methods: Following conceptual review guidance, we selected theories that address these challenges and integrated them into one framework.
Results: We synthesised five theoretical traditions (stress and resilience, social identity, affective forecasting, stress inoculation, and narrative identity) into four areas for assessment and intervention, framed as questions for the patient. What do I bring? covers beliefs about illness and treatment, coping and emotion regulation, and social support and group memberships. Where am I heading? covers how patients expect treatment to feel, including underestimating their ability to adapt. What do I need? uses stress inoculation to build and rehearse coping, with imagery for stressors that cannot be simulated. Who am I (becoming)? links these through the patient's personal story, from past coping to future recovery. The framework specifies testable mechanisms; for example, limited resources and skewed forecasts may predict distress during treatment. It maps onto universal, targeted, and specialist levels of provision.
Conclusions: The framework provides a theoretical basis for preventing distress through Psychological Prehabilitation for Cancer Treatment. It can guide intervention design, staff training, and evaluation. Research priorities are to test its mechanisms, evaluate it as a complex intervention, and develop brief screening tools that predict future distress.
Related
- Dual-theoretical framework integrating the stress process model and family systems theory-based psychological intervention for caregivers of children and adolescents with mood disorders: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
- Psychological preparation in multimodal cancer prehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of patients’ experiences
- Understanding ChatGPT adoption among medical students: an integrated theoretical model of psychological barriers and individual factors
- Co-Designing the iCanBlend Model: A Blended Psychological Therapy Intervention for Treating Anxiety and Depression in the Context of Cancer.
- Attitudes toward treating functional neurological disorders: psychological service provider perspectives
BibTeX
@misc{baliousis2026from,
title = {{From Treating to Preventing Distress through Psychological Prehabilitation – A Novel Theoretical Framework}},
author = {Michael Baliousis and Lauren Charlotte Heathcote and Chloe Grimmett and Lynn Calman and Christopher Meek and Nima Golijani-Moghaddam and David Dawson and Mike Rennoldson},
howpublished = {PsyArXiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.31234/osf.io/6xfp7_v1},
url = {https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/6xfp7_v1/},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - From Treating to Preventing Distress through Psychological Prehabilitation – A Novel Theoretical Framework
AU - Michael Baliousis
AU - Lauren Charlotte Heathcote
AU - Chloe Grimmett
AU - Lynn Calman
AU - Christopher Meek
AU - Nima Golijani-Moghaddam
AU - David Dawson
AU - Mike Rennoldson
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/21
PB - PsyArXiv
DO - 10.31234/osf.io/6xfp7_v1
UR - https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/6xfp7_v1/
AB - Background: In cancer prehabilitation, physical components predominate and psychological preparation is often overlooked. Yet up to half of patients develop distress during treatment, which undermines adherence, recovery, and quality of life. Psychological care remains largely reactive and lacks a unifying theoretical framework for prevention. Preventing distress poses three challenges: building resilience; doing so before patients have experienced treatment stressors; and tailoring this to each patient. Methods: Following conceptual review guidance, we selected theories that address these challenges and integrated them into one framework. Results: We synthesised five theoretical traditions (stress and resilience, social identity, affective forecasting, stress inoculation, and narrative identity) into four areas for assessment and intervention, framed as questions for the patient. What do I bring? covers beliefs about illness and treatment, coping and emotion regulation, and social support and group memberships. Where am I heading? covers how patients expect treatment to feel, including underestimating their ability to adapt. What do I need? uses stress inoculation to build and rehearse coping, with imagery for stressors that cannot be simulated. Who am I (becoming)? links these through the patient's personal story, from past coping to future recovery. The framework specifies testable mechanisms; for example, limited resources and skewed forecasts may predict distress during treatment. It maps onto universal, targeted, and specialist levels of provision. Conclusions: The framework provides a theoretical basis for preventing distress through Psychological Prehabilitation for Cancer Treatment. It can guide intervention design, staff training, and evaluation. Research priorities are to test its mechanisms, evaluate it as a complex intervention, and develop brief screening tools that predict future distress.
ER -