Melanie Roussin1, John Lowe2, Anita Hamilton2, Lisa Martin2. 1. School of Health and Behavioural Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sunshine Coast, QLD, 4556, Australia. melanie.roussin@research.usc.edu.au. 2. School of Health and Behavioural Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sunshine Coast, QLD, 4556, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment on sexual quality of life (SQoL) is a well-established survivorship issue for gynaecological cancer survivors (GCS), yet little is known on how to intervene. PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review was to identify the factors explaining the variability in SQoL for GCS. METHODS: We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework and the software Covidence. Electronic databases Scopus, Web of Science, PUBMED and CINAHL were searched for original research on GCS published between 2002 and 2018. We performed a two-stage screening process against selection criteria and quality assessment of individual studies. The Salutogenic Theory and the PRECEDE-PROCEED model were used as theoretical frameworks to identify and categorise factors. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 3,505 articles resulting in a total of 46 studies used to examine the association between factors of SQoL and gynaecological cancers. Our findings suggested that SQoL varies across subgroups based on age, menopausal status, relationship status, and treatment modality. Protective factors included clinicians' knowledge and confidence, preventive medical approach, risk and needs assessment, patient-clinician communication, relationship quality, psychosocial support, symptom management, accessibility of psychosexual care, and self-efficacy in the rediscovery of sexuality. CONCLUSION: Despite the high incidence and long-term impact of sexual health issues on quality of life, supportive care needs are not being met. A better understanding of the evidence base around the factors of SQoL can help health professionals take steps to protect and improve SQoL in GCS.
BACKGROUND: The impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment on sexual quality of life (SQoL) is a well-established survivorship issue for gynaecological cancer survivors (GCS), yet little is known on how to intervene. PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review was to identify the factors explaining the variability in SQoL for GCS. METHODS: We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework and the software Covidence. Electronic databases Scopus, Web of Science, PUBMED and CINAHL were searched for original research on GCS published between 2002 and 2018. We performed a two-stage screening process against selection criteria and quality assessment of individual studies. The Salutogenic Theory and the PRECEDE-PROCEED model were used as theoretical frameworks to identify and categorise factors. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 3,505 articles resulting in a total of 46 studies used to examine the association between factors of SQoL and gynaecological cancers. Our findings suggested that SQoL varies across subgroups based on age, menopausal status, relationship status, and treatment modality. Protective factors included clinicians' knowledge and confidence, preventive medical approach, risk and needs assessment, patient-clinician communication, relationship quality, psychosocial support, symptom management, accessibility of psychosexual care, and self-efficacy in the rediscovery of sexuality. CONCLUSION: Despite the high incidence and long-term impact of sexual health issues on quality of life, supportive care needs are not being met. A better understanding of the evidence base around the factors of SQoL can help health professionals take steps to protect and improve SQoL in GCS.
Entities:
Keywords:
Factors; Female cancer survivors; Gynaecological cancer; Healthy sexuality; Sexual quality of life; Systematic review
Authors: Sunita Vohra; Larissa Shamseer; Margaret Sampson; Cecilia Bukutu; Christopher H Schmid; Robyn Tate; Jane Nikles; Deborah R Zucker; Richard Kravitz; Gordon Guyatt; Douglas G Altman; David Moher Journal: BMJ Date: 2015-05-14