Opening the Conversation: study protocol for a Phase III trial to evaluate a couple-based intervention to reduce reproductive and sexual distress among young adult breast and gynecologic cancer survivor couples

Jessica R Gorman, Karen S Lyons, S Marie Harvey, Chiara Acquati, John M Salsman, Deborah A Kashy, Julia H Drizin, Ellie Smith, Lisa M Flexner, Brandon Hayes-Lattin, Jennifer B Reese, Jessica R Gorman, Karen S Lyons, S Marie Harvey, Chiara Acquati, John M Salsman, Deborah A Kashy, Julia H Drizin, Ellie Smith, Lisa M Flexner, Brandon Hayes-Lattin, Jennifer B Reese

Abstract

Background: Reproductive and sexual health (RSH) concerns are common and distressing for young adults diagnosed with breast and gynecologic cancer and their partners. This study evaluates the efficacy of a virtual couple-based intervention called Opening the Conversation (OC). The OC intervention is grounded in theory and evidence-based practice and was adapted to improve coping and communication specifically in relation to RSH concerns after cancer.

Methods: This Phase III trial is conducted in a fully remote setting and enrolls young adult couples (current age 18-44 years) with a history of breast or gynecologic cancer (stage 1-4, diagnosed under age 40) within the past 6 months to 5 years. Eligible dyads are recruited from across the USA. The target sample size is 100 couples. Dyads are randomly assigned to receive either the 5-session OC intervention or a 4-session active control intervention (Side by Side). The primary outcomes are change in reproductive distress and sexual distress. Secondary outcomes include communication about reproductive concerns, communication about sexual concerns, depressive symptoms, sexual function, relationship quality, relationship intimacy, sexual satisfaction, self-efficacy to communicate about sex and intimacy, and quality of life. An exploratory aim examines whether dyadic coping and communication quality mediate intervention effects on survivors' and partners' reproductive distress or sexual distress. Self-report outcome measures are assessed for both groups at baseline (T1), 2 weeks post-treatment (T2), and 3 months post-treatment (T3).

Discussion: Despite the importance of RSH for quality of life for young adult cancer survivors and their partners, evidence-based interventions that help couples navigate RSH concerns are lacking. This randomized controlled trial will determine the efficacy of a novel couple-based intervention to reduce distress related to RSH concerns for younger couples after breast or gynecologic cancer, in comparison to an active control intervention.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04806724. Registered on Mar 19, 2021.

Keywords: Breast cancer; Gynecologic cancer; Randomized controlled trial; Reproductive health; Sexual health; Young adult.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study conceptual framework
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Study flow diagram

References

    1. Miller KD, Fidler-Benaoudia M, Keegan TH, Hipp HS, Jemal A, Siegel RL. Cancer statistics for adolescents and young adults, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020;70(6):443–459. doi: 10.3322/caac.21637.
    1. Murphy BL, Day CN, Hoskin TL, Habermann EB, Boughey JC. Adolescents and young adults with breast cancer have more aggressive disease and treatment than patients in their forties. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(12):3920–3930. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07653-9.
    1. Warner EL, Kent EE, Trevino KM, Parsons HM, Zebrack BJ, Kirchhoff AC. Social well-being among adolescents and young adults with cancer: a systematic review. Cancer. 2016;122(7):1029–1037. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29866.
    1. Barnett M, McDonnell G, DeRosa A, Schuler T, Philip E, Peterson L, et al. Psychosocial outcomes and interventions among cancer survivors diagnosed during adolescence and young adulthood (AYA): a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(5):814–831. doi: 10.1007/s11764-016-0527-6.
    1. Schover LR, van der Kaaij M, van Dorst E, Creutzberg C, Huyghe E, Kiserud CE. Sexual dysfunction and infertility as late effects of cancer treatment. EJC Suppl. 2014;12(1):41–53. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcsup.2014.03.004.
    1. Vaz AF, Pinto-Neto AM, Conde DM, Costa-Paiva L, Morais SS, Pedro AO, et al. Quality of life and menopausal and sexual symptoms in gynecologic cancer survivors: a cohort study. Menopause. 2011;18(6):662–669. doi: 10.1097/gme.0b013e3181ffde7f.
    1. Karabulut N, Erci B. Sexual desire and satisfaction in sexual life affecting factors in breast cancer survivors after mastectomy. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2009;27(3):332–343. doi: 10.1080/07347330902979101.
    1. Fobair P, Hoppe RT, Bloom J, Cox R, Varghese A, Spiegel D. Psychosocial problems among survivors of Hodgkin’s disease. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4(5):805–814. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1986.4.5.805.
    1. Robinson L, Miedema B, Easley J. Young adult cancer survivors and the challenges of intimacy. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2014;32(4):447–462. doi: 10.1080/07347332.2014.917138.
    1. Bradford A, Fellman B, Urbauer D, Gallegos J, Meaders K, Tung C, et al. Assessment of sexual activity and dysfunction in medically underserved women with gynecologic cancers. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;139(1):134–140. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.08.019.
    1. Grover S, Hill-Kayser CE, Vachani C, Hampshire MK, DiLullo GA, Metz JM. Patient reported late effects of gynecological cancer treatment. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;124(3):399–403. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.11.034.
    1. Carter J, Chi DS, Brown CL, Abu-Rustum NR, Sonoda Y, Aghajanian C, et al. Cancer-related infertility in survivorship. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20(1):2–8. doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181bf7d3f.
    1. Levin AO, Carpenter KM, Fowler JM, Brothers BM, Andersen BL, Maxwell GL. Sexual morbidity associated with poorer psychological adjustment among gynecological cancer survivors. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20(3):461–470. doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181d24ce0.
    1. Robertson EG, Sansom-Daly UM, Wakefield CE, Ellis SJ, McGill BC, Doolan EL, et al. Sexual and romantic relationships: experiences of adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2016;5(3):286–291. doi: 10.1089/jayao.2015.0061.
    1. Ljungman L, Ahlgren J, Petersson LM, Flynn KE, Weinfurt K, Gorman JR, et al. Sexual dysfunction and reproductive concerns in young women with breast cancer: type, prevalence, and predictors of problems. Psychooncology. 2018;27(12):2770–2777. doi: 10.1002/pon.4886.
    1. Wettergren L, Kent EE, Mitchell SA, Zebrack B, Lynch CF, Rubenstein MB, et al. Cancer negatively impacts on sexual function in adolescents and young adults: the AYA HOPE study. Psychooncology. 2017;26(10):1632–1639. doi: 10.1002/pon.4181.
    1. Jing L, Zhang C, Li W, Jin F, Wang A. Incidence and severity of sexual dysfunction among women with breast cancer: a meta-analysis based on female sexual function index. Support Care Cancer. 2019;27(4):1171–1180. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04667-7.
    1. Olsson M, Steineck G, Enskär K, Wilderäng U, Jarfelt M. Sexual function in adolescent and young adult cancer survivors-a population-based study. J Cancer Surviv. 2018;12(4):450–459. doi: 10.1007/s11764-018-0684-x.
    1. Olsson M, Enskär K, Steineck G, Wilderäng U, Jarfelt M. Self-perceived physical attractiveness in relation to scars among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors: a population-based study. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2018;7(3):358–366. doi: 10.1089/jayao.2017.0089.
    1. Arndt V, Merx H, Sturmer T, Stegmaier C, Ziegler H, Brenner H. Age-specific detriments to quality of life among breast cancer patients one year after diagnosis. Eur J Cancer Care. 2004;40(5):673–680. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2003.12.007.
    1. Bidstrup PE, Christensen J, Mertz BG, Rottmann N, Dalton SO, Johansen C. Trajectories of distress, anxiety, and depression among women with breast cancer: Looking beyond the mean. Acta Oncol. 2015;54(5):789–796. doi: 10.3109/0284186X.2014.1002571.
    1. Acquati C, Kayser K. Dyadic coping across the lifespan: a comparison between younger and middle-aged couples with breast cancer. Front Psychol. 2019;10:404. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00404.
    1. Geue K, Schmidt R, Sender A, Sauter S, Friedrich M. Sexuality and romantic relationships in young adult cancer survivors: satisfaction and supportive care needs. Psychooncology. 2015;24(11):1368–1376. doi: 10.1002/pon.3805.
    1. Li M, Chan CWH, Chow KM, Xiao J, Choi KC. A systematic review and meta-analysis of couple-based intervention on sexuality and the quality of life of cancer patients and their partners. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(4):1607–1630. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-05215-z.
    1. Seay J, Mitteldorf D, Yankie A, Pirl WF, Kobetz E, Schlumbrecht MP. Survivorship care needs among LGBT cancer survivors. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2018;36(4):393–405. doi: 10.1080/07347332.2018.1447528.
    1. Brown MT, McElroy JA. Unmet support needs of sexual and gender minority breast cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer. 2018;26(4):1189–1196. doi: 10.1007/s00520-017-3941-z.
    1. Hulbert-Williams NJ, Plumpton CO, Flowers P, et al. The cancer care experiences of gay, lesbian and bisexual patients: A secondary analysis of data from the UK Cancer Patient Experience Survey. Eur J Cancer Care. 2017;26(4):e12670. 10.1111/ecc.12670.
    1. Boehmer U, Glickman M, Winter M, Clark MA. Long-term breast cancer survivors’ symptoms and morbidity: differences by sexual orientation? J Cancer Surviv. 2013;7(2):203–210. doi: 10.1007/s11764-012-0260-8.
    1. Regan TW, Lambert SD, Girgis A, Kelly B, Kayser K, Turner J. Do couple-based interventions make a difference for couples affected by cancer? A systematic review. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:279. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-12-279.
    1. Fredman SJ, Baucom DH, Gremore TM, Castellani AM, Kallman TA, Porter LS, et al. Quantifying the recruitment challenges with couple-based interventions for cancer: applications to early-stage breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2009;18(6):667–673. doi: 10.1002/pon.1477.
    1. Traa MJ, De Vries J, Bodenmann G, Den Oudsten BL. Dyadic coping and relationship functioning in couples coping with cancer: a systematic review. Br J Health Psychol. 2015;20(1):85–114. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12094.
    1. Badr H, Krebs P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions for couples coping with cancer. Psychooncology. 2013;22(8):1688–1704. doi: 10.1002/pon.3200.
    1. Scott JL, Kayser K. A review of couple-based interventions for enhancing women's sexual adjustment and body image after cancer. Cancer J. 2009;15(1):48–56. doi: 10.1097/PPO.0b013e31819585df.
    1. Epstein N, Baucom DH. Enhanced cognitive-behavioral therapy for couples: a contextual approach. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2002.
    1. Gorman JR, Smith E, Drizin JH, Lyons KS, Harvey SM. Navigating sexual health in cancer survivorship: a dyadic perspective. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:5429–5439. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05396-y.
    1. Bodenmann G, Pihet S, Kayser K. The relationship between dyadic coping and marital quality: a 2-year longitudinal study. J Fam Psychol. 2006;20(3):485–493. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.20.3.485.
    1. Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping and its significance for marital functioning. 2005. In: Ravenson TA, Kayser K, Bodnemann G, editors. Couples copign with stress: emerging persepctives on dyadic coping. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2005. pp. 33–49.
    1. Badr H. New frontiers in couple-based interventions in cancer care: refining the prescription for spousal communication. Acta Oncol. 2017;56(2):139–145. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2016.1266079.
    1. Otto AK, Ketcher D, Heyman RE, Vadaparampil ST, Ellington L, Reblin M. Communication between advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers: relationship with caregiver burden and preparedness for caregiving. Health Commun. 2021;36(6):714–721. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2020.1712039.
    1. Hawkey A, Ussher JM, Perz J, Parton C. Talking but not always understanding: couple communication about infertility concerns after cancer. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):161. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10188-y.
    1. Dryden A, Ussher JM, Perz J. Young women’s construction of their post-cancer fertility. Psychol Health. 2014;29(11):1341–1360. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2014.932790.
    1. Lehmann V, Nahata L, Ferrante AC, Hansen-Moore JA, Yeager ND, Klosky JL, et al. Fertility-related perceptions and impact on romantic relationships among adult survivors of childhood cancer. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2018;7(4):409–414. doi: 10.1089/jayao.2017.0121.
    1. Hummel SB, van Lankveld JJDM, Oldenburg HSA, Hahn DEE, Kieffer JM, Gerritsma MA, et al. Efficacy of internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy in improving sexual functioning of breast cancer survivors: results of a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(12):1328–1340. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.6021.
    1. Schover LR, Yuan Y, Fellman BM, Odensky E, Lewis PE, Martinetti P. Efficacy trial of an internet-based intervention for cancer-related female sexual dysfunction. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2013;11(11):1389–1397. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2013.0162.
    1. Carroll AJ, Baron SR, Carroll RA. Couple-based treatment for sexual problems following breast cancer: a review and synthesis of the literature. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(8):3651–3659. doi: 10.1007/s00520-016-3218-y.
    1. Porter LS, Keefe FJ, Baucom DH, Olsen M, Zafar SY, Uronis H. A randomized pilot trial of a videoconference couples communication intervention for advanced GI cancer. Psychooncology. 2017;26(7):1027–1035. doi: 10.1002/pon.4121.
    1. Richardson LK, Frueh BC, Grubaugh AL, Egede L, Elhai JD. Current directions in videoconferencing tele-mental health research. Clin Psychol Sci Pr. 2009;16(3):323–338. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01170.x.
    1. Rupert DJ, Poehlman JA, Hayes JJ, Ray SE, Moultrie RR. Virtual versus in-person focus groups: comparison of costs, recruitment, and participant logistics. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(3):e80. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6980.
    1. Heinrichs N, Zimmermann T, Huber B, Herschbach P, Russell DW, Baucom DH. Cancer distress reduction with a couple-based skills training: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Behav Med. 2012;43(2):239–252. doi: 10.1007/s12160-011-9314-9.
    1. Bodenmann G, Shantinath SD. The Couples Coping Enhancement Training (CCET): a new approach to prevention of marital distress based upon stress and coping. Fam Relat. 2004;53(5):477–484. doi: 10.1111/j.0197-6664.2004.00056.x.
    1. Bodenmann G, Randall AK, Falconier MK. Coping in couples: the Systemic Transactional Model (STM) In: Falconier MK, Randall AK, Bodenmann G, editors. Couples coping with stress: a cross-cultural perspective. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; 2016. pp. 5–22.
    1. Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping: a systemic-transactional view of stress and coping among couples: Theory and empirical findings. Eur Rev Appl Psychol. 1997;47(2):137–141.
    1. Bodenmann G. A systemic-transactional conceptualization of stress and coping in couples. Swiss J Psychol. 1995;54(1):34–49.
    1. Scott JL, Halford WK, Ward BG. United we stand? The effects of a couple-coping intervention on adjustment to early stage breast or gynecological cancer. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004;72(6):1122–1135. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.72.6.1122.
    1. Zimmermann T, Heinrichs N, Scott JL. CanCOPE “Schritt für Schritt”: Die Effektivität eines partnerschaftlichen Unterstützungsprogramms bei Frauen mit Brust- oder gynäkologischen Krebserkrankungen. [CanCOPE ‘Step by Step’: the effectiveness of a couple-based intervention program for women with breast or gynecological cancer] Verhaltenstherapie. 2006;16(4):247–255. doi: 10.1159/000096122.
    1. Gorman JR, Lyons KS, Reese JB, Acquati C, Smith E, Drizin JH, et al. Adapting a theory-informed intervention to help young adult couples cope with reproductive and sexual concerns after cancer. Front Psychol. 2022;13:813548. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.813548.
    1. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gøtzsche PC, Krleža-Jerić K, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):200–207. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-3-201302050-00583.
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group C CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Trials. 2010;11:32. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-11-32.
    1. Armuand GM, Wettergren L, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Lampic C. Desire for children, difficulties achieving a pregnancy, and infertility distress 3 to 7 years after cancer diagnosis. Support Care Cancer. 2014;22(10):2805–2812. doi: 10.1007/s00520-014-2279-z.
    1. Moura-Ramos M, Gameiro S, Canavarro MC, Soares I. Assessing infertility stress: re-examining the factor structure of the Fertility Problem Inventory. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(2):496–505. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der388.
    1. Newton CR, Sherrard W, Glavac I. The Fertility Problem Inventory: measuring perceived infertility-related stress. Fertil Steril. 1999;72(1):54–62. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00164-8.
    1. Frost R, Donovan C. The development and validation of the Sexual and Relationship Distress Scale. J Sex Med. 2018;15(8):1167–1179. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.06.004.
    1. Arden-Close E, Moss-Morris R, Dennison L, Bayne L, Gidron Y. The Couples’ Illness Communication Scale (CICS): development and evaluation of a brief measure assessing illness-related couple communication. Br J Health Psychol. 2010;15(Pt 3):543–559. doi: 10.1348/135910709X476972.
    1. Kroenke K, Strine TW, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Berry JT, Mokdad AH. The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2009;114(1-3):163–173. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2008.06.026.
    1. Arthur EK, Wills CE, Browning K, Overcash J, Menon U. The Self-Efficacy to Communicate about Sex and Intimacy (SECSI) scale: psychometric assessment in women treated for cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(3):1449–1457. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04963-2.
    1. Wiegel M, Meston C, Rosen R. The female sexual function index (FSFI): cross-validation and development of clinical cutoff scores. J Sex Marital Ther. 2005;31(1):1–20. doi: 10.1080/00926230590475206.
    1. Baser RE, Li Y, Carter J. Psychometric validation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in cancer survivors. Cancer. 2012;118(18):4606–18. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26739.
    1. Rosen RC, Cappelleri JC, Gendrano N., 3rd The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): a state-of-the-science review. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14(4):226–244. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900857.
    1. Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S, Meston C, Shabsigh R, et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2000;26(2):191–208. doi: 10.1080/009262300278597.
    1. Hunsley J, Best M, Lefebvre M, Vito D. The seven-item short form of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale: further evidence for construct validity. Am J Fam Ther. 2001;29(4):325–335. doi: 10.1080/01926180126501.
    1. Hendrick SS. A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. J Marriage Fam. 1988;50(1):93–98. doi: 10.2307/352430.
    1. Sharpley CF, Rogers HJ. Preliminary validation of the Abbreviated Spanier Dyadic Adjustment Scale - some psychometric data regarding a screening-test of marital adjustment. Educ Psychol Meas. 1984;44(4):1045–1050. doi: 10.1177/0013164484444029.
    1. Miller RS, Lefcourt HM. The assessment of social intimacy. J Pers Assess. 1982;46(5):514–518. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4605_12.
    1. Mark KP, Herbenick D, Fortenberry JD, Sanders S, Reece M. A psychometric comparison of three scales and a single-item measure to assess sexual satisfaction. J Sex Res. 2014;51(2):159–169. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2013.816261.
    1. Lawrance K-aG, Byers ES. Development of the interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction in long term relationships. Can J Hum Sex. 1992;1:123–128.
    1. Hays RD, Bjorner JB, Revicki DA, Spritzer KL, Cella D. Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(7):873–880. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9496-9.
    1. Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, et al. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(11):1179–1194. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.011.
    1. Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping and the significance of this concept for prevention and therapy. Z Gesundheitspsychol. 2008;16(3):108–111. doi: 10.1026/0943-8149.16.3.108.
    1. Randall AK, Hilpert P, Jimenez-Arista LE, Walsh KJ, Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping in the US: psychometric properties and validity for use of the English Version of the Dyadic Coping Inventory. Curr Psychol. 2016;35(4):570–582. doi: 10.1007/s12144-015-9323-0.
    1. Futris TG, Campbell K, Nielsen RB, Burwell SR. The Communication Patterns Questionnaire-Short Form: a review and assessment. Fam J. 2010;18(3):275–287. doi: 10.1177/1066480710370758.
    1. Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick C, Powell BJ, Dorsey CN, Clary AS, et al. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0635-3.
    1. Lang KM, Little TD. Principled Missing Data Treatments. Prev Sci. 2018;19(3):284-94. 10.1007/s11121-016-0644-5.
    1. Gorman JR, Drizin JH, Smith E, Flores-Sanchez Y, Harvey SM. Patient-centered communication to address young adult breast cancer survivors’ reproductive and sexual health concerns. Health Commun. 2021;36(13):1743–1758. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2020.1794550.
    1. Keesing S, Rosenwax L, McNamara B. A dyadic approach to understanding the impact of breast cancer on relationships between partners during early survivorship. BMC Womens Health. 2016;16(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s12905-016-0337-z.
    1. Hawkey AJ, Ussher JM, Perz J, Parton C, Patterson P, Bateson D, et al. The impact of cancer-related fertility concerns on current and future couple relationships: People with cancer and partner perspectives. Eur J Cancer Care. 2021;30(1):e13348. doi: 10.1111/ecc.13348.
    1. Luk BHK, Loke AY. Sexual satisfaction, intimacy and relationship of couples undergoing infertility treatment. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2019;37(2):108–122. doi: 10.1080/02646838.2018.1529407.
    1. Hill EK, Sandbo S, Abramsohn E, Makelarski J, Wroblewski K, Wenrich ER, et al. Assessing gynecologic and breast cancer survivors’ sexual health care needs: Sexual Care Needs of Cancer Survivors. Cancer. 2011;117(12):2643–2651. doi: 10.1002/cncr.25832.
    1. Kubo A, Altschuler A, Kurtovich E, Hendlish S, Laurent CA, Kolevska T, et al. A pilot mobile-based mindfulness intervention for cancer patients and their informal caregivers. Mindfulness. 2018;9(6):1885–1894. doi: 10.1007/s12671-018-0931-2.
    1. Lengacher CA, Reich RR, Ramesar S, Alinat CB, Moscoso M, Cousin L, et al. Feasibility of the mobile mindfulness-based stress reduction for breast cancer (mMBSR(BC)) program for symptom improvement among breast cancer survivors. Psychooncology. 2018;27(2):524–531. doi: 10.1002/pon.4491.
    1. Rosen KD, Paniagua SM, Kazanis W, Jones S, Potter JS. Quality of life among women diagnosed with breast cancer: a randomized waitlist controlled trial of commercially available mobile app-delivered mindfulness training. Psychooncology. 2018;27(8):2023–2030. doi: 10.1002/pon.4764.
    1. Russell L, Ugalde A, Milne D, Krishnasamy M, Seung Chul EO, Austin DW, et al. Feasibility of an online mindfulness-based program for patients with melanoma: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2018;19:223. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2575-x.
    1. Zernicke KA, Campbell TS, Speca M, McCabe-Ruff K, Flowers S, Carlson LE. A randomized wait-list controlled trial of feasibility and efficacy of an online mindfulness–based cancer recovery program: the etherapy for cancer applying mindfulness trial. Psychosom Med. 2014;76(4):257–267. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000053.
    1. Trevino KM, Raghunathan N, Latte-Naor S, Polubriaginof FCG, Jensen C, Atkinson TM, et al. Rapid deployment of virtual mind-body interventions during the COVID-19 outbreak: feasibility, acceptability, and implications for future care. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29(2):543–546. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05740-2.
    1. Baldwin-Medsker A, Holland J, Rodriguez ES. Access to Care: Using eHealth to limit location-based barriers for patients with cancer. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2020;24:16–23. doi: 10.1188/20.CJON.S1.16-23.
    1. Klesges LM, Estabrooks PA, Dzewaltowski DA, Bull SS, Glasgow RE. Beginning with the application in mind: designing and planning health behavior change interventions to enhance dissemination. Ann Behav Med. 2005;29(Suppl):66–75. doi: 10.1207/s15324796abm2902s_10.
    1. Kerner J, Rimer B, Emmons K. Introduction to the special section on dissemination—dissemination research and research dissemination: how can we close the gap? Health Psychol. 2005;24(5):443–446. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.24.5.443.
    1. Reese JB, Smith KC, Handorf E, Sorice K, Bober SL, Bantug ET, et al. A randomized pilot trial of a couple-based intervention addressing sexual concerns for breast cancer survivors. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2019;37(2):242–263. doi: 10.1080/07347332.2018.1510869.
    1. Ljungman L, Eriksson LE, Flynn KE, Gorman JR, Stahl O, Weinfurt K, et al. Sexual dysfunction and reproductive concerns in young men diagnosed with testicular cancer: an observational study. J Sex Med. 2019;16(7):1049–1059. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.05.005.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner