Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Starting the Conversation: randomized pilot trial of an intervention to promote effective clinical communication about sexual health for gynecologic cancer survivors
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Starting the Conversation: randomized pilot trial of an intervention to promote effective clinical communication about sexual health for gynecologic cancer survivors
Do you wish to request the book?
Starting the Conversation: randomized pilot trial of an intervention to promote effective clinical communication about sexual health for gynecologic cancer survivors
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Starting the Conversation: randomized pilot trial of an intervention to promote effective clinical communication about sexual health for gynecologic cancer survivors
2024
Overview
Purpose
Gynecologic cancer survivors often hesitate to raise sexual health concerns with their clinicians. We pilot tested Starting the Conversation (STC), a theory-guided intervention aimed at facilitating survivors’ clinical communication about sexual health.
Methods
Survivors (
N
= 32) were randomized 2:1 to STC (23-min video and accompanying workbook grounded in social cognitive theory that provides information and skills training for communicating with providers about sexual concerns, and resource guide) or control (resource guide only). Feasibility was assessed through enrollment, retention, and intervention completion rates (benchmarks: 60%, 80%, 70%); acceptability was assessed through post-intervention program evaluations (benchmark: 75%). Preliminary effects were assessed for sexual health communication (self-reported after next clinic encounter), self-efficacy for clinical communication about sexual health (post-intervention and 2-month follow-up), and sexual activity and anxiety/depressive symptoms (2-month follow-up).
Results
All feasibility/acceptability benchmarks were surpassed; 76% enrolled, 97% retained, ≥ 95% used intervention materials, and 100% endorsed STC as acceptable. Positive STC effects were seen for increases in self-efficacy (Cohen’s d’s = 0.45 at post-intervention; 0.55 at follow-up). In STC, 35% and 45% of women raised or asked about sexual health concerns during the post-intervention clinic visit, respectively, versus 0 and 27% in the control arm. Other measures showed little change.
Conclusions
Data support the STC intervention as feasible and acceptable, with promising effects for gynecologic cancer survivors’ communication about sexual health concerns. Because sexual health communication is relevant across the treatment trajectory, we included both on-treatment and post-treatment survivors. While this may be a limitation, it could also enhance sample generalizability. A larger trial is needed to determine efficacy.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
Communication about sexual health is important yet lacking for cancer survivors. Patient-focused interventions may help address concerns and improve survivors’ health outcomes.
Publisher
Springer US,Springer Nature B.V
