Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T09:18:45.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study investigating professional attitudes and confidence in providing sexuality information to prostate cancer patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2011

D. Griffiths  and
D.A. Hodgson
D. Griffiths*
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy Department, University Hospital Bristol, Bristol, UK
D.A. Hodgson
Affiliation:
Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
*
Correspondence to: D. Griffiths, Radiotherapy Department, University Hospital Bristol, Horfield Road, Bristol, BS2 8ED, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Purpose: Sexual dysfunction is a well-documented side effect of radical radiotherapy treatment for prostate cancer and the provision of information to patients is often a radiotherapist and assistant role. The study sought to measure the attitudes and beliefs of individuals before and after an educational intervention and establish current practice in providing sexual information.

Method: A quantitative approach with a minor qualitative element was used. A simple pre–post test questionnaire design using an adapted version of the Reynold and Magnan (2005) Sexual Attitudes and Beliefs’ Questionnaire was utilised. The educational intervention was a Reflective Learning Package (RLP).

Results: Fifty-six participants took part, a response rate of 87.5%. The data was analysed using SPSS, version 15. The RLP had a highly significant effect on improving the attitudes and beliefs of the participants (Wilcoxon test 0.000 p < 0.001). Qualitative data key themes showed lack of knowledge, confidence and embarrassment were the main barriers to giving sexuality information during the ‘first day chat’.

Conclusion: There may be a need to address the current methods of education and support of staff being prepared to perform this important role and to recognise that personal limitations may influence the individuals’ effectiveness in communicating sexuality information.

Keywords

Radiotherapysexuality informationprostate cancersexual dysfunctionattitudesconfidence
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , December 2011 , pp. 215 - 227
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Department of Health. Health of the Nation. DoH, London, 1992.Google Scholar
National Institute of Clinical Excellence. Improving Supportive and Palliative Care of Adults with Cancer. National Institute of Clinical Excellence, London, 2004.Google Scholar
Royal College of Nursing. RCN Sexual Health Strategy. Guidence for Nursing Staff. RCN London, 2001.Google Scholar
Grönberg, H. Prostate cancer epidemiology. Lancet 2003; 361:859–864.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schover, LR, Fouladi, RT, Warneke, CL, Neese, L, Klein, EA, Zippe, C, Kupelian, PA. Seeking help for erectile dysfunction after treatment for prostate cancer. Arch Sex Behav 2004; 33:443–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monga, U, Kerrigan, A, Garber, S, Monga, T. Pre- and Post-radiotherapy sexual functioning in prostae cancer. Sex Disabil 2001; 19:239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassouna, MM, Heaton, JP. Prostate cancer: 8. Urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. CMAJ 1999; 160:78–86.Google ScholarPubMed
Standards of Proficiency Health Professions Council. Sept 2009.Google Scholar
Learning and Develpoment Framework for Clinical Imaging and Oncology. The Society of Radiographers. Feb 2008.Google Scholar
Society of Radiographers. Consent to imaging and radiotherapy treatment. College of Radiographers, London, 2007.Google Scholar
Health Professions Council. Standards of conduct, performance and ethics. Your duties as registrant. Health Professions Council, London, 2008.Google Scholar
Magnan, MA, Reynolds, KE, Galvin, EA. Barriers to addressing patient sexuality in nursing practice. Medsurg Nurs 2005; 14:282–9; quiz 290.Google ScholarPubMed
Katz, A. The sounds of silence: sexuality information for cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:238–241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Incrocci, L, Slob, AK, Levendag, PC. Sexual (dys)function after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 52:681–693.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lemieux, L, Kaiser, S, Pereira, J, Meadows, LM. Sexuality in palliative care: patient perspectives. Palliat Med 2004; 18:630–637.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brennan, J. Cancer in Context: A Practical Guide to Supportive Care. Oxford University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
White, I, Heath, H. The Challenge of Sexuality in Health Care. Blackwell Science, UK, 2002.Google Scholar
Howlett, C. Sexuality: the neglected component in palliative care. J Int Palliat Nurs 1997; 3: 218–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herson, L, Hart, KA, Gordon, MJ, Rintala, DH. Identifying and overcoming barriers to providing sexuality information in the clinical setting. Rehabil Nurs 1999; 24:148–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, S. Building and Using a Model of Nursing, 2nd Edition. London, Edward Arnold, 1990.Google Scholar
Eagly, AH, Chaiken, S. The Psychology of Attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, London, 1993.Google Scholar
Hogg, MA, Vaughan, GM. Social Psychology: An Introduction. Hemel Hempstead, Prentice Hall, 1995.Google Scholar
Katz, D. The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public opinion Quarterly, 1960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hordern, AJ, Street, AF. Let’s talk about sex: risky business for cancer and palliative care clinicians. Contemp Nurse 2007; 27:49–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, C, Kelly, KA, Weaver, K. Attitudes norms and social groups. In: Social Cognition, Brewer, MB, Hewstone, M (eds). Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 2004.Google Scholar
Polit, DR, Hungler, BP. Nursing Research: Principles and Methods. Lippincott, London.Google Scholar
Gross, R, Kinnison, N. Psychology for Nurses and Allied Health Professionals. Hodder Arnold, London, 2007.Google Scholar