Literature DB >> 22674206

The current fertility preservation consultation model: are we adequately informing cancer patients of their options?

Ursula Balthazar1, Allison M Deal, Marc A Fritz, Laxmi A Kondapalli, Ja Yeon Kim, Jennifer E Mersereau.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is very limited information about the amount of information that cancer patients retain after a fertility preservation (FP) consultation (FPC). Our objective was to assess patients' knowledge following FPC and to examine predictors of increased knowledge.
METHODS: We conducted a multi-center, cross-sectional, web-based survey at academic IVF centers, including women aged 18-43 years seen for comprehensive FPC between April 2009 and December 2010. The primary outcome measure was a knowledge score designed to assess comprehension of FP options. Analysis was performed to assess which patient variables were associated with higher knowledge scores. A 13-item knowledge tool about FP was developed (Kuder-Richardson 20=0.64). RESULT(S): Among 90 eligible subjects, 66 were successfully contacted and 52 completed the survey (79% response rate). Participant's median age was 30.7 (interquartile range (IQR) 24.9-36.9) years and most were Caucasian, college graduates, nulliparous and in a committed relationship. The median knowledge post-FPC score was 6 (IQR: 5-9). Higher knowledge scores were associated with a college education, higher income, a primary diagnosis of breast cancer, additional contact with the FP specialist following the initial FPC and use of specific reference websites such as www.fertilehope.org. Parity, marital status and completion of FP treatment were not associated with knowledge scores.
CONCLUSIONS: FP knowledge following comprehensive FPC remains limited. Modifications to the current single visit FPC, such as a standard follow-up visit or additional educational tools, may be needed to improve patient comprehension of complex FP treatment options. Further research is needed to validate the knowledge scale in broader populations of cancer patients receiving FPC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22674206      PMCID: PMC6457080          DOI: 10.1093/humrep/des188

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  23 in total

1.  Young women's experience of breast cancer: defining young and identifying concerns.

Authors:  J Dunn; S K Steginga
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.894

2.  Same gain, less pain: potential patient preferences for adjuvant treatment in premenopausal women with early breast cancer.

Authors:  Lesley Fallowfield; Rhona McGurk; Michael Dixon
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 9.162

3.  Web-based survey of fertility issues in young women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Ann H Partridge; Shari Gelber; Jeffrey Peppercorn; Ebonie Sampson; Katherine Knudsen; Marc Laufer; Randi Rosenberg; Michele Przypyszny; Alison Rein; Eric P Winer
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-10-15       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Promoting informed choice: transforming health care to dispense knowledge for decision making.

Authors:  Steven H Woolf; Evelyn C Y Chan; Russell Harris; Stacey L Sheridan; Clarence H Braddock; Robert M Kaplan; Alex Krist; Annette M O'Connor; Sean Tunis
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2005-08-16       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  The fertility- and menopause-related information needs of younger women with a diagnosis of breast cancer: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Belinda Thewes; Bettina Meiser; Judy Rickard; Michael Friedlander
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.894

6.  The multi-dimensional measure of informed choice: a validation study.

Authors:  Susan Michie; Elizabeth Dormandy; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2002-09

7.  Measuring patient knowledge of the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  David M Radosevich; Melissa R Partin; Sean Nugent; David Nelson; Ann Barry Flood; Jeremy Holtzman; Nancy Dillon; Michele Haas; Timothy J Wilt
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2004-08

8.  Helping patients make informed choices: a randomized trial of a decision aid for adjuvant chemotherapy in lymph node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Timothy Whelan; Carol Sawka; Mark Levine; Amiram Gafni; Leonard Reyno; Andrew Willan; Jim Julian; Susan Dent; Hakam Abu-Zahra; Edmond Chouinard; Richard Tozer; Kathleen Pritchard; Ilona Bodendorfer
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-04-16       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Decision aids and breast cancer: do they influence choice for surgery and knowledge of treatment options?

Authors:  Jennifer F Waljee; Mary A M Rogers; Amy K Alderman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-03-20       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Issues and concerns of young Australian women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Shirley Connell; Carla Patterson; Beth Newman
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-02-04       Impact factor: 3.603

View more
  21 in total

1.  Factors associated with pregnancy attempts among female young adult cancer survivors.

Authors:  Sally A Dominick; Brian W Whitcomb; Jessica R Gorman; Jennifer E Mersereau; Karine Chung; H Irene Su
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2014-05-24       Impact factor: 4.442

2.  Management of Potential Long-Term Toxicities in Breast Cancer Patients.

Authors:  C C O'Sullivan; K J Ruddy
Journal:  Curr Breast Cancer Rep       Date:  2016-10-13

3.  Do Patient Characteristics Decide if Young Adult Cancer Patients Undergo Fertility Preservation?

Authors:  Dina M Flink; Jeanelle Sheeder; Laxmi A Kondapalli
Journal:  J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 2.223

4.  On-Site Fertility Preservation Services for Adolescents and Young Adults in a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Authors:  Mary Peavey; Sara Arian; William Gibbons; Karen Lu; David Gershenson; Terri Woodard
Journal:  J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.223

5.  Occurrence and recall rates of fertility discussions with young breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Rahul Banerjee; Ekaterini Tsiapali
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Early referral makes the decision-making about fertility preservation easier: a pilot survey study of young female cancer survivors.

Authors:  Jayeon Kim; Jennifer E Mersereau
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-11-26       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Priorities in Fertility Decisions for Reproductive-Aged Cancer Patients: Fertility Attitudes and Cancer Treatment Study.

Authors:  Dina M Flink; Laxmi A Kondapalli; Yvonne Kellar-Guenther
Journal:  J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 2.223

Review 8.  Fertility preservation for patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update.

Authors:  Alison W Loren; Pamela B Mangu; Lindsay Nohr Beck; Lawrence Brennan; Anthony J Magdalinski; Ann H Partridge; Gwendolyn Quinn; W Hamish Wallace; Kutluk Oktay
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Assessing information and service needs of young adults with cancer at a single institution: the importance of information on cancer diagnosis, fertility preservation, diet, and exercise.

Authors:  Abha A Gupta; Kim Edelstein; Alisha Albert-Green; Norma D'Agostino
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-04-21       Impact factor: 3.603

10.  Factors associated with the receipt of fertility preservation services along the decision-making pathway in young Canadian female cancer patients.

Authors:  Samantha Yee
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 3.412

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.