Fertility preservation in pediatric and adolescent cancer patients in Switzerland: A qualitative cross-sectional survey

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. 141-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara Diesch ◽  
Nicolas Xavier von der Weid ◽  
Gabor Szinnai ◽  
Sabine Schaedelin ◽  
Christian De Geyter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Fertility Preservation ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Adolescent Cancer

scholarly journals The Knowledge, Attitude, and Self-Reported Behaviors of Oncology Physicians Regarding Fertility Preservation in Adult Cancer Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 1119-1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanfeng Zhang ◽  
Guorong Wang ◽  
Bin Jiang ◽  
Maoqiu Cao ◽  
Qinghua Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Training Program ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Fertility Preservation ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Knowledge Score ◽  
Reproductive Age ◽  
Childbearing Age ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional

Abstract There is a growing concern about the fertility preservation for adult cancer patients of reproductive age. Very little literature exists about fertility preservation of cancer survivors in Chinese text. This study is first to describe the knowledge level, attitude, and practice behaviors among physicians concerning fertility preservation in adult cancer patients in China. A cross-sectional survey with 30-item was conducted to assess Chinese oncology physicians’ knowledge, attitude, and behaviors regarding fertility issues. Of 360 oncology physicians, 206 (57.2%) submitted valid questionnaires. With possible overall scores for knowledge and attitude of 9 and 15, respectively, physicians’ responses to the questionnaires were 3.91 ± 1.67 and 12.29 ± 1.23. Only 49.5% of physicians routinely informed their cancer patients of childbearing age about the risk of infertility with cancer treatment. The knowledge score of the men physicians was 2-fold that of the women. Physicians aged 20–29 years were significantly more likely than other age groups to prioritize cancer treatment over fertility concerns. Men physicians were significantly more comfortable than the women discussing fertility preservation issues and cooperating with fertility specialists. The oncology physicians in China had limited knowledge of fertility preservation and rarely discussed these issues with their patients, although their attitude was positive. Results suggest that oncology physicians would welcome an in-house fertility-related training program. Key Messages This is the first study to address the topic of fertility preservation as it relates to the care that oncologists provide to cancer patients in China. These results revealed the importance of providing fertility-related training program to oncology physicians. Moreover, this study should provide useful information for other Asian countries, and highlight both the similarities and differences between China and Western countries concerning the reproductive rights of patients. This study should encourage international cooperation with institutions of scientific research and education.

The impact of an ostomy on older colorectal cancer patients: a cross-sectional survey

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. M. Verweij ◽  
M. E. Hamaker ◽  
D. D. E. Zimmerman ◽  
Y. T. van Loon ◽  
F. van den Bos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients ◽  
The Impact

Patients’ knowledge and awareness of safe handling of oral anticancer agents at Sultan Qaboos University Hospital in Oman

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522110562
Author(s):  
Moataz M Hassan ◽  
Dhabya Al-Marzooq ◽  
Hanan Al-Habsi ◽  
Amna Al-Hashar ◽  
Murtadha Al-Khabori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Anticancer Agents ◽  
Oral Chemotherapy ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Safe Handling ◽  
Chemotherapy Drugs ◽  
Oral Anticancer Agents

Background Safe handling of oral anticancer agents is of great concern. There is a lack of clear, national guidelines on how patients can safely handle and dispose of unwanted medications. We aimed to evaluate the safe handling, storage, and disposal of oral anticancer drugs among cancer patients and caregivers at home. Method This cross-sectional survey of adult cancer patients (or their adult caregivers) used a closed-ended questionnaire from May 2019 to March 2020. Results A total of 257 patients (50 ± 15 years; range: 18–93 years) were enrolled; however, only 91% (233/257) reported self-administering oral anticancer medications. Caregivers were more likely to administer oral anticancer agents for patients ≥60 years than those <40 years old (63% vs. 8%; P = 0.001). Most patients (52%; 133/257) did not wash their hands after administering the drug; 74% (164/222) of the respondents reported that their medications were kept in a bedroom cabinet, while 18% (40/222) stored their medications in a refrigerator, and 5% (12/222) in a kitchen cabinet. A total of 55% (68/124) of patients returned their excess oral chemotherapy medications to the hospitals; however, 36% (45/124) disposed of their unused oral chemotherapy drugs in a household garbage container. Conclusion While two-thirds of patients stored their oral anticancer medications properly, more than half used inappropriate handling procedures. Disposal practices were inconsistent and did not adhere to the reported international guidelines.

Quality of life after different procedures for regional control in oral cancer patients: cross-sectional survey

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 228-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
T.M. Govers ◽  
W.H. Schreuder ◽  
W.M.C. Klop ◽  
J.P.C. Grutters ◽  
M.M. Rovers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Oral Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Regional Control ◽  
Oral Cancer Patients

scholarly journals Physical activity interests and preferences of cancer patients with brain metastases: a cross-sectional survey

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonya S. Lowe ◽  
Brita Danielson ◽  
Crystal Beaumont ◽  
Sharon M. Watanabe ◽  
Kerry S. Courneya
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional

Burden of Visits for Treating Side Effects of Chemotherapy or Radiotherapy in Cancer Patients.

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 5518-5518
Author(s):  
David H. Henry ◽  
Shawn M. Wade ◽  
Mariana Servin ◽  
William Hershfield
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Healthcare Professional ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Part Time ◽  
Receive Treatment ◽  
Doctor's Office ◽  
To Receive

Abstract INTRODUCTION: The time incurred in seeking care for the treatment of side effects of chemotherapy (CT) or radiotherapy (RT) can result in lost productivity and resulting lost wages for cancer patients (pts) and their caregivers. The purpose of this study was to assess the amount of time spent by pts and caregivers to seek treatment for side effects of CT/RT and to examine productivity losses associated with such visits. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from April to May 2006 using a random sample of pts from a chronic illness panel of 550,233 pts. Inclusion criteria were being at least 18 years of age, diagnosed with cancer, and receiving CT and/or RT either currently or during the 12 months prior to participating in the study. Percentages and means were used to calculate descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 1,569 cancer pts were surveyed: 1,302 pts online and 267 pts by telephone. No significant differences were found between phone and online respondents. Of the pts currently receiving CT and/or RT (N=814), a total of 249 pts received treatment for side effects of CT/RT. The total time spent per visit to receive treatment for side-effects of CT/RT was approximately 5 hrs/visit including preparation time, travel time, and time spent at the clinic. Approximately one-half (54%) of the 249 patients currently receiving treatment for side effects of CT/RT were employed full-time (44%) or part-time (10%). Among employed patients currently receiving treatment for side effects of CT/RT, the mean number of work days missed as a result of visits for the treatment of CT/RT related side effects was 20 days per year. The primary reason for continuing to work during cancer treatment was financial need, reported by 59% of patients. Approximately 83% of all patients indicated that a caregiver generally accompanied them on their visits to the doctor’s office, clinic, or hospital to receive treatment for side effects of CT/RT. Seven out of ten caregivers (68%) were reported as being employed either full-time (62%) or part-time (6%). CONCLUSIONS: Time related burden for patients receiving treatment for side effects of CT/RT and their caregivers is significant. Reduction in frequency of such visits is important from the standpoint of patients’ economic livelihood and can stand to benefit employers and society. Table 1. Time Spent on Healthcare Provider Visits for Treatment of Side Effects Related to Chemotherapy and/or Radiation (N=249) Activity (per visit) Minutes Spent (mean) Standard Deviation Minutes Spent (median) Preparing to go to the doctor’s office, clinic or hospital 81 127 55 Travel to and from the doctor’s office, clinic, or hospital 102 188 58 Waiting at the doctor’s office, clinic, or hospital to see the doctor or another healthcare professional 64 72 39 Seeing the doctor or another healthcare professional 64 75 43 Total 311 380 210

Fertility preservation in children newly diagnosed with cancer: Existing standards of practice in Australia and New Zealand

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9047-9047
Author(s):  
J. A. Heath ◽  
C. J. Stern
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Fertility Preservation ◽  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
North American ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Ovarian Tissue ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
And Storage

9047 Background: Over the past two decades, rapid advances have occurred in both the successful treatment of childhood cancers and reproductive medicine. We sought to establish the current level of clinical practice for sperm, oocyte and gonadal tissue collection and storage in children newly diagnosed with cancer in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ). Methods: A cross-sectional survey of all pediatric oncology services in ANZ was performed. Comparisons to recently published North American practices and to current recommendations for best practice were also made. Results: Of the 13 centers invited to participate, 12 (92%) completed the survey. All centers had offered sperm conservation, but only ten (83%) had offered oocyte/ovarian tissue conservation. Available methods of gamete collection and storage were not consistent. Two centers were using GnRH agonists as fertility protection in post-pubertal females. Forty-two per cent had offered fertility conservation to males and females prior to completion of sexual development. All centers were more likely to offer sperm conservation than oocyte conservation for any given disease. The most common diseases for which conservation was offered were lymphomas and sarcomas. The anticipated cumulative dose at which centers elected to offer fertility preservation varied widely, both for the alkylator cyclophosphamide (1g/m2 to 10g/m2) and for abdominal/pelvic irradiation (any to 12 Gy) and spinal irradiation (any to 18Gy). Fertility counseling was offered in a variety of settings by 82% of centers. Despite 92% of centers agreeing that fertility preservation guidelines would be helpful, only two (17%) had any in place. Overall, there was greater uptake and consistency of utilization of fertility services in ANZ when compared with published North American data. Conclusions: There are inconsistencies regarding the indications for and methods of gamete conservation in pediatric oncology centers throughout ANZ. Unresolved medical, legal and ethical issues suggest the development of guidelines and a voluntary code of practice would be helpful. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Impact of skeletal related events (SREs) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in prostate cancer patients with bone metastases (BM).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16046-e16046
Author(s):  
Jorge Arellano ◽  
Kristina S Chen ◽  
Carolyn Atchison ◽  
Alex Rider ◽  
Andrew Worsfold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Underlying Disease ◽  
Cord Compression ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cancer Disease ◽  
The Impact

e16046 Background: Advanced prostate cancer often leads to the development of BM and as a result SREs. Treatment and management of SREs, as well as the underlying disease, influences the patient’s HRQoL and HRU. We evaluated the impact of SREs on HRQoL (FACT-P) and HRU in patients with BM. Methods: Data were extracted from the Adelphi Prostate Cancer Disease-Specific Programme (DSP), a cross-sectional survey of 150 urologists and oncologists and their prostate cancer patients conducted from March to June 2012 in the US. Each specialist completed comprehensive record forms on 12 of their patients being treated for prostate cancer. Patients were invited to complete a questionnaire, which included the FACT-P HRQoL instrument. Patients were stratified by SRE experience to assess the impact of SRE on patients with BM. SRE was defined as an event of bone radiation, bone surgery, fracture, or spinal cord compression. Results: Data were collected from 1,749 prostate cancer patients, of which 941 were identified with BM; SRE status was recorded in 499 BM patients (Table). HRQoL was significantly lower in patients experiencing SREs, while the rate of consultations and likelihood of being hospitalized was significantly higher. Conclusions: SREs result in a significant economic burden on the healthcare system and negative impact on HRQoL in prostate cancer patients with BM. [Table: see text]

Oncologists’ perspectives on medical marijuana for the elderly.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 78-78
Author(s):  
Desiree Rachel Azizoddin ◽  
Andrea Catherine Enzinger ◽  
Alexi A. Wright ◽  
Miryam Yusufov ◽  
Fangxin Hong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Medical Marijuana ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Elderly Cancer Patients ◽  
Treatment Side Effects ◽  
Nationally Representative

78 Background: Cancer patients are increasingly using medical marijuana (MM) to manage symptoms and treatment side effects. Although cancer disproportionately affects the elderly, little is known about oncologists’ attitudes toward MM in this population. We surveyed US oncologists’ beliefs about the benefits of MM for older adults, and examined their associations with oncologists’ perceptions of MM efficacy and safety. Methods: 232 out of 400 randomly selected U.S. oncologists (63% response rate) completed a cross-sectional survey about their beliefs and recommendations regarding MM for cancer patients. Using Chi-square tests, we examined associations between oncologists’ demographics, their perceptions of geriatric MM use, as well as beliefs about comparative effectiveness of MM for cancer related symptoms, and comparative risks of MM to prescription opioids. Results: Among 232 oncologists included in this cohort, 109 (47.0%) reported that MM had at least some benefit for elderly cancer patients, 66 (28.4%) responded it was rarely or never beneficial, and 57 (24.6%) reported not knowing. There were no significant associations between oncologists’ beliefs about MM’s benefit for older adults and their sociodemographic characteristics. Those who believed MM was beneficial for the elderly were significantly more likely to report that MM was at least as effective as standard treatments for the following indications: coping (58.3% vs. 26.6%), appetite (83.3% vs 58.5%), depression (46.3% vs 25.0%), and nausea (66.7% vs 33.9%), respectively ( p < 0.001). In contrast, oncologists’ beliefs about MM for the elderly were not significantly associated with perceptions of the comparative risks of MM ( p > 0.05). Conclusions: In this nationally-representative sample of US oncologists, about half thought MM was beneficial for older adults with cancer. Oncologists’ support of MM for older adults was associated with perceptions of MM’s efficacy but was not associated with perceptions of MM’s risks. More research is needed regarding the safety and efficacy of MM to guide oncologists’ recommendations about its use in older adults.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document