INTRODUCTION: Interventions designed to help couples recover sexual intimacy after prostatectomy have not been guided by a comprehensive conceptual model. AIM: We examined a proposed biopsychosocial conceptual model of couples' sexual recovery that included functional, psychological, and relational aspects of sexuality, surgery-related sexual losses, and grief and mourning as recovery process. METHODS: We interviewed 20 couples preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. between 2010 and 2012. Interviews were analyzed with Analytic Induction qualitative methodology, using NVivo software. Paired t-tests described functional assessment data. Study findings led to a revised conceptual model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Couples' experiences were assessed through semi-structured interviews; male participants' sexual function was assessed with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and female participants' sexual function with the Female Sexual Function Index. RESULTS: Preoperatively, 30% of men had erectile dysfunction (ED) and 84% of partners were postmenopausal. All valued sexual recovery, but worried about cancer spread and surgery side effects. Faith in themselves and their surgeons led 90% of couples to overestimate erectile recovery. Postoperatively, most men had ED and lost confidence. Couples' sexual activity decreased. Couples reported feeling loss and grief: cancer diagnosis was the first loss, followed by surgery-related sexual losses. Couples' engagement in intentional sex, patients' acceptance of erectile aids, and partners' interest in sex aided the recovery of couples' sexual intimacy recovery. Unselfconscious sex, not returning to erectile function baseline, was seen as the end point. Survey findings documented participants' sexual function losses, confirming qualitative findings. CONCLUSIONS: Couples' sexual recovery requires addressing sexual function, feelings about losses, and relationship simultaneously. Perioperative education should emphasize the roles of nerve damage in ED and grief and mourning in sexual recovery.
INTRODUCTION: Interventions designed to help couples recover sexual intimacy after prostatectomy have not been guided by a comprehensive conceptual model. AIM: We examined a proposed biopsychosocial conceptual model of couples' sexual recovery that included functional, psychological, and relational aspects of sexuality, surgery-related sexual losses, and grief and mourning as recovery process. METHODS: We interviewed 20 couples preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. between 2010 and 2012. Interviews were analyzed with Analytic Induction qualitative methodology, using NVivo software. Paired t-tests described functional assessment data. Study findings led to a revised conceptual model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Couples' experiences were assessed through semi-structured interviews; male participants' sexual function was assessed with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and female participants' sexual function with the Female Sexual Function Index. RESULTS: Preoperatively, 30% of men had erectile dysfunction (ED) and 84% of partners were postmenopausal. All valued sexual recovery, but worried about cancer spread and surgery side effects. Faith in themselves and their surgeons led 90% of couples to overestimate erectile recovery. Postoperatively, most men had ED and lost confidence. Couples' sexual activity decreased. Couples reported feeling loss and grief: cancer diagnosis was the first loss, followed by surgery-related sexual losses. Couples' engagement in intentional sex, patients' acceptance of erectile aids, and partners' interest in sex aided the recovery of couples' sexual intimacy recovery. Unselfconscious sex, not returning to erectile function baseline, was seen as the end point. Survey findings documented participants' sexual function losses, confirming qualitative findings. CONCLUSIONS: Couples' sexual recovery requires addressing sexual function, feelings about losses, and relationship simultaneously. Perioperative education should emphasize the roles of nerve damage in ED and grief and mourning in sexual recovery.
Authors: Zvi Symon; Stephanie Daignault; Rachel Symon; Rodney L Dunn; Martin G Sanda; Howard M Sandler Journal: Urology Date: 2006-12-04 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Sharon L Manne; David W Kissane; Christian J Nelson; John P Mulhall; Gary Winkel; Talia Zaider Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2011-01-06 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Jeremy W Couper; Sidney Bloch; Anthony Love; Gillian Duchesne; Michelle Macvean; David W Kissane Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2006-10-16 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Nicole Collaço; Carol Rivas; Lauren Matheson; Johana Nayoan; Richard Wagland; Obrey Alexis; Anna Gavin; Adam Glaser; Eila Watson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Dean S Elterman; Anika R Petrella; Lauren M Walker; Brandon Van Asseldonk; Leah Jamnicky; Gerald B Brock; Stacy Elliott; Antonio Finelli; Jerzy B Gajewski; Keith A Jarvi; John Robinson; Janet Ellis; Shaun Shepherd; Hossein Saadat; Andrew Matthew Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-12-03 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: B R Simon Rosser; Badrinath R Konety; Darryl Mitteldorf; Nidhi Kohli; Lindsey Lesher; William West; Benjamin D Capistrant; James Dewitt; Enyinnaya Merengwa; Gunna Kilian Journal: Urol Pract Date: 2018-05
Authors: Marigdalia K Ramirez-Fort; Paula Suarez; Margely Carrion; Daniel Weiner; Claire Postl; Ricardo Arribas; Mehdi Sayyah; Digna V Forta; M Junaid Niaz; Amir Feily; Christopher S Lange; Zhahedia Zhaythseff Fort; Migdalia Fort Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2020-04-30