Ali Ben Charif1, Anne-Déborah Bouhnik2, Blandine Courbiere3, Dominique Rey1, Marie Préau4, Marc-Karim Bendiane1, Patrick Peretti-Watel2, Julien Mancini5. 1. Aix Marseille Université, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques et Sociales de la Santé et Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille; ORS PACA, Observatoire régional de la santé Provence Alpes Côte d'Azur, Marseille, France. 2. Aix Marseille Université, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques et Sociales de la Santé et Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille. 3. IMBE UMR7263, Aix Marseille Université, CNRS, IRD, Avignon Université, Marseille, France; Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, AP-HM, La Conception Hospital, Marseille, France. 4. GRePS, Psychology Institute, Lyon 2 University, Bron, France. 5. Aix Marseille Université, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques et Sociales de la Santé et Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille; APHM, Hôpital de la Timone, Service Biostatistique et Technologies de l'Information et de la Communication, Marseille, France. Electronic address: julien.mancini@univ-amu.fr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A discussion about sexuality should become a routine part of the personalized care pathway for patients with cancer. AIM: To assess rates of patient discussion about sexuality with health care providers after cancer. METHODS: We used data from the representative French nationwide 2012 VICAN survey, which included 4,349 adults 18 to 82 years old who were still alive 2 years after diagnosis at 12 cancer sites. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported rates of discussion about sexuality with health care providers were assessed, and associated factors were tested after systematic adjustment for a sexual health indicator (created from six items of the Relationship and Sexuality Scale). RESULTS: Of 4,181 respondents to the question on a discussion about sexuality, 54.7% reported that nobody had proposed a discussion to them, 21.9% did not want any discussion, and 23.4% had had a discussion. Women had less discussion about sexuality with health care providers (11.1% vs 36.7% of men, P < .001) and were more likely to request a discussion at their own initiative (62.9% vs 48.0% of men, P < .001). Discussion about sexuality was more frequent with patients with prostate (56.3%) and cervical (39.6%) cancer, but increasing age was associated with a greater reluctance to discuss this issue (odds ratio = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.04-1.2). The likelihood of discussion increased with severe sexual problems, radiotherapy, general sequelae, having an information-seeker profile, previous professional psychological help, and initial treatment in private centers. Patients initially wishing for psychological help were more likely to desire a discussion about sexuality. CONCLUSION: Sexuality receives little attention in French patients with cancer. Inequalities in the discussion about sexuality were observed in relation to the type of care center where the patient was initially managed. Information on supportive interventions, including more systematic referral for professional psychological help, should be developed to facilitate discussion and should be offered to all patients, irrespective of severity of sexual problems, age, sex, cancer site, and care center.
INTRODUCTION: A discussion about sexuality should become a routine part of the personalized care pathway for patients with cancer. AIM: To assess rates of patient discussion about sexuality with health care providers after cancer. METHODS: We used data from the representative French nationwide 2012 VICAN survey, which included 4,349 adults 18 to 82 years old who were still alive 2 years after diagnosis at 12 cancer sites. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported rates of discussion about sexuality with health care providers were assessed, and associated factors were tested after systematic adjustment for a sexual health indicator (created from six items of the Relationship and Sexuality Scale). RESULTS: Of 4,181 respondents to the question on a discussion about sexuality, 54.7% reported that nobody had proposed a discussion to them, 21.9% did not want any discussion, and 23.4% had had a discussion. Women had less discussion about sexuality with health care providers (11.1% vs 36.7% of men, P < .001) and were more likely to request a discussion at their own initiative (62.9% vs 48.0% of men, P < .001). Discussion about sexuality was more frequent with patients with prostate (56.3%) and cervical (39.6%) cancer, but increasing age was associated with a greater reluctance to discuss this issue (odds ratio = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.04-1.2). The likelihood of discussion increased with severe sexual problems, radiotherapy, general sequelae, having an information-seeker profile, previous professional psychological help, and initial treatment in private centers. Patients initially wishing for psychological help were more likely to desire a discussion about sexuality. CONCLUSION: Sexuality receives little attention in French patients with cancer. Inequalities in the discussion about sexuality were observed in relation to the type of care center where the patient was initially managed. Information on supportive interventions, including more systematic referral for professional psychological help, should be developed to facilitate discussion and should be offered to all patients, irrespective of severity of sexual problems, age, sex, cancer site, and care center.
Authors: Roma Maguire; Lisa McCann; Grigorios Kotronoulas; Nora Kearney; Emma Ream; Jo Armes; Elisabeth Patiraki; Eileen Furlong; Patricia Fox; Alexander Gaiger; Paul McCrone; Geir Berg; Christine Miaskowkski; Antonella Cardone; Dawn Orr; Adrian Flowerday; Stylianos Katsaragakis; Andrew Darley; Simone Lubowitzki; Jenny Harris; Simon Skene; Morven Miller; Margaret Moore; Liane Lewis; Nicosha DeSouza; Peter T Donnan Journal: BMJ Date: 2021-07-21
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
Authors: Sharon Linsey Bingham; Cherith Jane Semple; Carrie Flannagan; Lynn Dunwoody Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-01-12 Impact factor: 3.359