Sexual health in cancer: the results of a survey exploring practices, attitudes, knowledge, communication, and professional interactions in oncology healthcare providers

• Published in: Supportive care in cancer Vol. 27; no. 3; pp. 887 - 894
• Main Authors: Almont, Thierry, Farsi, Fadila, Krakowski, Ivan, El Osta, Rabih, Bondil, Pierre, Huyghe, Éric
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.03.2019; Springer; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Cancer; Family physicians; General practitioners; Health surveys; Medical personnel; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Nursing; Nursing Research; Oncology; Original Article; Pain Medicine; Physicians; Polls & surveys; Professionals; Psychologists; Rehabilitation Medicine; Sexuality; Training; Attitudes; Healthcare professionals; Oncosexology; Clinical practice; Communication
• ISSN: 0941-4355; 1433-7339
• DOI: 10.1007/s00520-018-4376-x

Purpose To assess, focusing on population of healthcare professionals providing oncosexology care to men with cancer, clinical practice, attitudes, knowledge, communication, and professional interaction. Methods We performed a descriptive cross-sectional study with an online self-administered e-questionnaire addressed to all medical, paramedical, or administrative professionals attending the 4th “Cancer, Sexuality and Fertility” Meeting in Toulouse, France. Their participation was voluntary and totally anonymous. Results The 165 respondents comprised 44% of physicians, 47% of paramedics, and 9% of other health professionals in oncology, from all French regions. Paramedics were significantly younger than physicians ( p  = .006). One third of respondents were degreed in sexology, but 75.8% were in demand of oncosexology-specific trainings, particularly paramedics ( p  = .029). Regarding the oncosexology network, respondents declared being linked to organ specialists (56.8%), psychologists (49.5%), oncologists (47.4%), nurses (31.5%), radiation therapists (27.4%), and general practitioners (25.3%). Compared to paramedics, physicians were more likely to be engaged in oncosexology care ( p  = .039) and couple counseling ( p  = .005), but the proportions of counseled patients or couple were identical ( p  = .430 and p  = .252, respectively). Overall, 90% of respondents reported discussing sexuality issues with patients. Regarding the time for discussion, physicians reported communicating more at cancer announcement ( p  = .004) or after treatments ( p  = .015), while more paramedics reported discussing at another time ( p  = .005). Regarding the place for discussion, paramedics more frequently reported talking about sexuality in the hospital room ( p  = .001) or during a specific consult ( p  = .007). Conclusions Results emphasize various levels for improving existing oncosexology care, such as developing oncosexology-specific educational and practical training programs, particularly for paramedics; consolidating information, counseling, and therapeutic education with formal procedures like implementing medical and paramedical “oncosexology moments,” or strengthening the community-hospital networks, from diagnosis to survivorship.