Search

Objective: Cancer and treatments for cancer affect specific aspects of sexual functioning and intimacy; however, limited qualitative work has been done in diverse cancer populations. As part of an effort to improve measurement of self-reported sexual functioning, we explored the scope and importance of sexual functioning and intimacy to patients across cancer sites and along the continuum of care.Methods: We conducted 16 diagnosis- and sex-specific focus groups with patients recruited from the Duke University tumor registry and oncology/hematology clinics (N=109). A trained note taker produced field notes summarizing the discussions. An independent auditor verified field notes against written transcripts. The content of the discussions was analyzed for major themes by two independent coders.Results: Across all cancers, the most commonly discussed cancer- or treatment-related effects on sexual functioning and intimacy were fatigue, treatment-related hair loss, weight gain and organ loss or scarring. Additional barriers were unique to particular diagnoses, such as shortness of breath in lung cancer, gastrointestinal problems in colorectal cancers and incontinence in prostate cancer. Sexual functioning and intimacy were considered important to quality of life. While most effects of cancer were considered negative, many participants identified improvements to intimacy after cancer.Conclusion: Overall evaluations of satisfaction with sex life did not always correspond to specific aspects of functioning (e.g. erectile dysfunction), presenting a challenge to researchers aiming to measure sexual functioning as an outcome. Health-care providers should not assume that level of sexual impairment determines sexual satisfaction and should explore cancer patients' sexual concerns directly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Cancer and its treatments disturb sleep-wake functioning; however, there is little information available on the characteristics and consequences of sleep problems associated with cancer. As part of an effort to improve measurement of sleep-wake functioning, we explored the scope of difficulties with sleep in a diverse group of patients diagnosed with cancer.Methods: We conducted 10 focus groups with patients recruited from the Duke University tumor registry and oncology/hematology clinics. Separate groups were held with patients scheduled to begin or currently undergoing treatment for breast, prostate, lung, colorectal, hematological, and other cancer types and with patients who were in posttreatment follow-up. The content of the focus group discussions was transcribed and analyzed for major themes by independent coders.Results: Participants not only reported causes of sleep disturbance common in other populations, such as pain and restless legs, but they also reported causes that may be unique to cancer populations, including abnormal dreams, anxiety about cancer diagnosis and recurrence, night sweats, and problems with sleep positioning. Many participants felt that sleep problems reduced their productivity, concentration, social interactions, and overall quality of life. Many also shared beliefs about the increased importance of sleep when fighting cancer.Conclusions: The findings underscore the need for interventions that minimize the negative impact of cancer and its treatments on sleep. This study will inform efforts now underway to develop a patient-reported measure of sleep-wake functioning that reflects the breadth of concepts considered important by patients with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The US National Cancer Institute (NCI) developed software to gather symptomatic adverse events directly from patients participating in clinical trials. The software administers surveys to patients using items from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) through Web-based or automated telephone interfaces and facilitates the management of survey administration and the resultant data by professionals (clinicians and research associates)., Objective: The purpose of this study was to iteratively evaluate and improve the usability of the PRO-CTCAE software., Methods: Heuristic evaluation of the software functionality was followed by semiscripted, think-aloud protocols in two consecutive rounds of usability testing among patients with cancer, clinicians, and research associates at 3 cancer centers. We conducted testing with patients both in clinics and at home (remotely) for both Web-based and telephone interfaces. Furthermore, we refined the software between rounds and retested., Results: Heuristic evaluation identified deviations from the best practices across 10 standardized categories, which informed initial software improvement. Subsequently, we conducted user-based testing among 169 patients and 47 professionals. Software modifications between rounds addressed identified issues, including difficulty using radio buttons, absence of survey progress indicators, and login problems (for patients) as well as scheduling of patient surveys (for professionals). The initial System Usability Scale (SUS) score for the patient Web-based interface was 86 and 82 (P=.22) before and after modifications, respectively, whereas the task completion score was 4.47, which improved to 4.58 (P=.39) after modifications. Following modifications for professional users, the SUS scores improved from 71 to 75 (P=.47), and the mean task performance improved significantly (4.40 vs 4.02; P=.001)., Conclusions: Software modifications, informed by rigorous assessment, rendered a usable system, which is currently used in multiple NCI-sponsored multicenter cancer clinical trials., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01031641; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01031641 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/708hTjlTl)., (©Martin W Schoen, Ethan Basch, Lori L Hudson, Arlene E Chung, Tito R Mendoza, Sandra A Mitchell, Diane St. Germain, Paul Baumgartner, Laura Sit, Lauren J Rogak, Marwan Shouery, Eve Shalley, Bryce B Reeve, Maria R Fawzy, Nrupen A Bhavsar, Charles Cleeland, Deborah Schrag, Amylou C Dueck, Amy P Abernethy. Originally published in JMIR Human Factors (http://humanfactors.jmir.org), 16.07.2018.)

Background: Cancer incidence and mortality is increasing in the developing world. Inequities between low-, middle-, and high-income countries affect disease burden and the infrastructure needs in response to cancer. We surveyed early-career oncologists attending workshops in clinical research in three countries with emerging economies about their perception of the evolving cancer burden., Methods: A cross-sectional survey questionnaire was distributed at clinical trial concept development workshops held in Beijing, Lahore, Karachi, and Mumbai at major hospitals to acquire information regarding home-country health conditions and needs., Results: A total of 100 respondents participated in the workshops held at major hospitals in the region (India = 29, China = 25, Pakistan = 42, and other = 4). Expected consensus on many issues (e.g., emergence of cancer as a significant health issue) was balanced with significant variation in priorities, opportunities, and challenges. Chinese respondents prioritized improvements in cancer-specific care and palliative care, Indian respondents favored improved cancer detection and advancing research in cancer care, and Pakistani respondents prioritized awareness of cancer and improvements in disease detection and cancer care research. For all, the most frequently cited opportunity was help in improving professional cancer education and training., Conclusion: Predominantly early-career oncologists attending clinical research workshops (in China, India, and Pakistan) identified needs for increasing clinical cancer research, professional education, and public awareness of cancer. Decision makers supporting efforts to reduce the burden of cancer worldwide will need to factor the specific needs and aspirations of health care providers in their country in prioritizing health policies and budgets., (©AlphaMed Press.)

Introduction: Despite the ubiquity of 1-month recall periods for measures of sexual function, there is limited evidence for how well recalled responses correspond to individuals' actual daily experiences., Aim: To characterize the correspondence between daily sexual experiences and 1-month recall of those experiences., Methods: Following a baseline assessment of sexual functioning, health, and demographic characteristics, 202 adults from the general population (101 women, 101 men) were recruited to complete daily assessments of their sexual function online for 30 days and a single recall measure of sexual function at day 30., Main Outcome Measures: At the baseline and 30-day follow-ups, participants answered items asking about sexual satisfaction, sexual activities, interest, interfering factors, orgasm, sexual functioning, and use of therapeutic aids during the previous 30 days. Participants also completed a measure of positive and negative affect at follow-up. The main outcome measures were agreement between the daily and 1-month recall versions of the sexual function items., Results: Accuracy of recall varied depending on the item and on the gender and mood of the respondent. Recall was better (low bias and higher correlations) for sexual activities, vaginal discomfort, erectile function, and more frequently used therapeutic aids. Recall was poorer for interest, affectionate behaviors (e.g., kissing), and orgasm-related items. Men more than women overestimated frequency of interest and masturbation. Concurrent mood was related to over- or underreporting for six items addressing the frequency of masturbation and vaginal intercourse, erectile function, and orgasm., Conclusions: A 1-month recall period seems acceptable for many aspects of sexual function in this population, but recall for some items was poor. Researchers should be aware that concurrent mood can have a powerful biasing effect on reports of sexual function., (© 2013 International Society for Sexual Medicine.)