• Ben Huntingdon, Penelope Schofield, Zahava Wolfowicz, Rebecca Bergin, Donna Kabel, Jennifer Edmunds, Sylvia Penberthy, and Ilona Juraskova.
• School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Brennan MacCallum Building (A18), Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
• Support Care Cancer. 2016 Feb 1; 24 (2): 849-856.

PurposeResearch into dyadic (one-to-one) peer support has predominantly focused on the recipients of peer support whilst neglecting the impact on the peer support providers (PSPs). Increasingly, structured/protocolised peer support interventions are employed. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the experience of providing peer support within a protocolised intervention and how common key characteristics of such interventions (guidelines and checklists, rigorous training and partnerships with health professionals) may influence PSPs' experiences. This research was conducted within the context of an ongoing randomised controlled trial investigating a protocolised peer support intervention (the Peer and Nurse support Trial to Assist women in Gynaecological Oncology (PeNTAGOn) study).MethodsEleven women (gynaecological cancer survivors) providing peer support within the PeNTAGOn study participated in semi-structured telephone interviews. Transcribed interviews were analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis.ResultsFive key themes were identified which described the overall experience of providing protocolised peer support: (i) fitting oneself to the protocolised PSP role, (ii) the impact of personal beliefs about the value of research, (iii) protocolisation as both blessing and curse, (iv) discussing taboo or sensitive topics and (v) the impact of interactions with study personnel.ConclusionsThese insights into the advantages and disadvantages of protocolised peer support can be used to inform future research and social support programs and maximise the effectiveness of such programs for patients, PSPs and the health-care system.

16 keywords...

hide…