Jennifer Barsky Reese1,2, Kristen Sorice3, Mary Catherine Beach4, Laura S Porter5, James A Tulsky6, Mary B Daly7, Stephen J Lepore8. 1. Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center, 333 Cottman Ave, 4th Floor, Young Pavilion, Philadelphia, PA, 19111, USA. Jennifer.Reese@fccc.edu. 2. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, College of Public Health, Temple University, 1301 Cecil B. Moore Ave., Ritter Annex, 9th Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA. Jennifer.Reese@fccc.edu. 3. Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center, 333 Cottman Ave, 4th Floor, Young Pavilion, Philadelphia, PA, 19111, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 2024 E. Monument St., Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. 5. Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, DUMC 90399, Durham, NC, 27708, USA. 6. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, DA-2016A, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. 7. Department of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, 333 Cottman Ave, 4th Floor, Young Pavilion, Philadelphia, PA, 19111, USA. 8. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, College of Public Health, Temple University, 1301 Cecil B. Moore Ave., Ritter Annex, 9th Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cancer survivors' needs around sexual concerns are often unmet. The primary objective of this systematic review was to examine the prevalence of and factors associated with patient-provider communication about sexual concerns in cancer. METHODS: Using PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and CINAHL databases for peer-reviewed quantitative research papers (2000-2015) in cancer samples. Search terms across three linked categories were used (sexuality, communication, and cancer). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Sexual Function Guidelines were used as a framework to categorize communication reported in each study. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies from 10 countries (29 % in USA) were included. Studies assessed patients only (21), providers only (4), and both (4). Communication measures differed across studies and many lacked validity data. When reported by patients or providers, the average prevalence of discussing potential treatment effects on sexual function was 50 (60 % for men and 28 % for women) and 88 %, respectively. As reported by patients or providers, respectively, assessing patients' sexual concerns (10 and 21 %) and offering treatments (22 and 17 %) were measured in fewer studies and were reported less frequently. Both patients and providers (28 and 32 %, respectively) reported a low prevalence of other non-specific communication. Greater prevalence of communication was associated with male patient gender and more years of provider experience. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual issues go unaddressed for many cancer survivors, particularly women. Both patient and provider interventions are needed. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Enhancing patient-provider communication about sexual concerns through evidence-based interventions could improve patient sexual function and quality of life.
PURPOSE:Cancer survivors' needs around sexual concerns are often unmet. The primary objective of this systematic review was to examine the prevalence of and factors associated with patient-provider communication about sexual concerns in cancer. METHODS: Using PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and CINAHL databases for peer-reviewed quantitative research papers (2000-2015) in cancer samples. Search terms across three linked categories were used (sexuality, communication, and cancer). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Sexual Function Guidelines were used as a framework to categorize communication reported in each study. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies from 10 countries (29 % in USA) were included. Studies assessed patients only (21), providers only (4), and both (4). Communication measures differed across studies and many lacked validity data. When reported by patients or providers, the average prevalence of discussing potential treatment effects on sexual function was 50 (60 % for men and 28 % for women) and 88 %, respectively. As reported by patients or providers, respectively, assessing patients' sexual concerns (10 and 21 %) and offering treatments (22 and 17 %) were measured in fewer studies and were reported less frequently. Both patients and providers (28 and 32 %, respectively) reported a low prevalence of other non-specific communication. Greater prevalence of communication was associated with male patient gender and more years of provider experience. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual issues go unaddressed for many cancer survivors, particularly women. Both patient and provider interventions are needed. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Enhancing patient-provider communication about sexual concerns through evidence-based interventions could improve patient sexual function and quality of life.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer; Communication; Patient-provider communication; Sexual function; Sexual health
Authors: Willemijn M Vermeer; Rinske M Bakker; Gemma G Kenter; Cor D de Kroon; Anne M Stiggelbout; Moniek M ter Kuile Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2014-09-02 Impact factor: 3.894
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: Stacy Tessler Lindau; Emily M Abramsohn; Shirley R Baron; Judith Florendo; Hope K Haefner; Anuja Jhingran; Vanessa Kennedy; Mukta K Krane; David M Kushner; Jennifer McComb; Diane F Merritt; Julie E Park; Amy Siston; Margaret Straub; Lauren Streicher Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Nihal E Mohamed; Phapichaya Chaoprang Herrera; Shawna Hudson; Tracey A Revenson; Cheryl T Lee; Diane Z Quale; Christina Zarcadoolas; Simon J Hall; Michael A Diefenbach Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-07-30 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: M Kunneman; C A M Marijnen; T Rozema; H M Ceha; D A R H Grootenboers; K J Neelis; A M Stiggelbout; A H Pieterse Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Jennifer Barsky Reese; Kristen A Sorice; Lauren A Zimmaro; Stephen J Lepore; Mary Catherine Beach Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2020-04-04
Authors: Jennifer Barsky Reese; Kristen Sorice; Stephen J Lepore; Mary B Daly; James A Tulsky; Mary Catherine Beach Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2018-10-04
Authors: Crystal S Denlinger; Tara Sanft; K Scott Baker; Shrujal Baxi; Gregory Broderick; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Debra L Friedman; Mindy Goldman; Melissa Hudson; Nazanin Khakpour; Allison King; Divya Koura; Elizabeth Kvale; Robin M Lally; Terry S Langbaum; Michelle Melisko; Jose G Montoya; Kathi Mooney; Javid J Moslehi; Tracey O'Connor; Linda Overholser; Electra D Paskett; Jeffrey Peppercorn; M Alma Rodriguez; Kathryn J Ruddy; Paula Silverman; Sophia Smith; Karen L Syrjala; Amye Tevaarwerk; Susan G Urba; Mark T Wakabayashi; Phyllis Zee; Deborah A Freedman-Cass; Nicole R McMillian Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Kathryn E Flynn; Dane Whicker; Li Lin; Rachel Cusatis; Alan Nyitray; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-08-26 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Casey M Hay; Heidi S Donovan; Erin G Hartnett; Jeanne Carter; Mary C Roberge; Grace B Campbell; Benjamin E Zuchelkowski; Sarah E Taylor Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 3.437