Vanessa Kennedy1, Emily Abramsohn2, Jennifer Makelarski3, Rachel Barber4, Kristen Wroblewski5, Meaghan Tenney6, Nita Karnik Lee6, S Diane Yamada7, Stacy Tessler Lindau8. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, United States; Program in Integrative Sexual Medicine for Women and Girls with Cancer, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. Electronic address: vanessa.kennedy@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu. 2. Program in Integrative Sexual Medicine for Women and Girls with Cancer, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; Chicago Core on Biomeasures in Population-Based Aging Research at the NORC and University of Chicago Center on Demography and Economics of Aging, United States. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. 4. Program in Integrative Sexual Medicine for Women and Girls with Cancer, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. 5. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. 6. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL, United States. 7. Program in Integrative Sexual Medicine for Women and Girls with Cancer, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL, United States. 8. Program in Integrative Sexual Medicine for Women and Girls with Cancer, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL, United States; Department of Medicine - Geriatrics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; Chicago Core on Biomeasures in Population-Based Aging Research at the NORC and University of Chicago Center on Demography and Economics of Aging, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe patterns of response to, and assess sexual function and activity elicited by, a self-administered assessment incorporated into a new patient intake form for gynecologic oncology consultation. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of patients presenting to a single urban academic medical center between January 2010 and September 2012. New patients completed a self-administered intake form, including six brief sexual activity and function items. These items, along with abstracted medical record data, were descriptively analyzed. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between sexual activity and function and disease status, adjusting for age. RESULTS: Median age was 50 years (range 18-91, N=499); more than half had a final diagnosis of cancer. Most patients completed all sex-related items on the intake form; 98% answered at least one. Among patients who were sexually active in the prior 12 months (57% with cancer, 64% with benign disease), 52% indicated on the intake form having, during that period, a sexual problem lasting several months or more. Of these, 15% had physician documentation of the sexual problem. Eighteen women were referred for care. Providers reported no patient complaints about the inclusion of sexual items on the intake form. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all new patients presenting for gynecologic oncology consultation answered self-administered items to assess sexual activity and function. Further study is needed to determine the role of pre-treatment identification of sexual function concerns in improving sexual outcomes associated with cancer diagnosis and treatment.
OBJECTIVES: To describe patterns of response to, and assess sexual function and activity elicited by, a self-administered assessment incorporated into a new patient intake form for gynecologic oncology consultation. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of patients presenting to a single urban academic medical center between January 2010 and September 2012. New patients completed a self-administered intake form, including six brief sexual activity and function items. These items, along with abstracted medical record data, were descriptively analyzed. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between sexual activity and function and disease status, adjusting for age. RESULTS: Median age was 50 years (range 18-91, N=499); more than half had a final diagnosis of cancer. Most patients completed all sex-related items on the intake form; 98% answered at least one. Among patients who were sexually active in the prior 12 months (57% with cancer, 64% with benign disease), 52% indicated on the intake form having, during that period, a sexual problem lasting several months or more. Of these, 15% had physician documentation of the sexual problem. Eighteen women were referred for care. Providers reported no patient complaints about the inclusion of sexual items on the intake form. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all new patients presenting for gynecologic oncology consultation answered self-administered items to assess sexual activity and function. Further study is needed to determine the role of pre-treatment identification of sexual function concerns in improving sexual outcomes associated with cancer diagnosis and treatment.
Authors: Emily K Hill; Stacey Sandbo; Emily Abramsohn; Jennifer Makelarski; Kristen Wroblewski; Emily R Wenrich; Stacy McCoy; Sarah M Temkin; S Diane Yamada; Stacy T Lindau Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-12-23 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kathryn E Flynn; Jennifer Barsky Reese; Diana D Jeffery; Amy P Abernethy; Li Lin; Rebecca A Shelby; Laura S Porter; Carrie B Dombeck; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2011-03-10 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Stacy Tessler Lindau; L Philip Schumm; Edward O Laumann; Wendy Levinson; Colm A O'Muircheartaigh; Linda J Waite Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-08-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J L Hubbs; E L Dickson Michelson; R I Vogel; C L Rivard; D G K Teoh; Melissa A Geller Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: C Emi Bretschneider; Kemi M Doll; Jeannette T Bensen; Paola A Gehrig; Jennifer M Wu; Elizabeth J Geller Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2017-08-22 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: E M Krouwel; L F Albers; M P J Nicolai; H Putter; S Osanto; R C M Pelger; H W Elzevier Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 2.037