4.4 Article

Factors associated with healthcare professional's rating of disfigurement and self-perceived body image in female patients with head and neck cancer

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE
Volume 27, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12710

Keywords

body image; disfigurement; female; head and neck cancer

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology in Taiwan [NSC101-2629-B-255-002]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology [NSC101-2629-B-255-002]
  3. Chang Gung Memorial Hospital [NMRPF3B0121]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to determine factors associated with self-perceived body image in female patients with head and neck cancer (HNC), and factors associated with healthcare professional's rating of disfigurement, as well as the correlation between patient and observer ratings. This cross-sectional study recruited 105 women with HNC at a large medical centre. Measures of facial disfigurement and body image, as well as demographic and clinical characteristics, were collected. Multivariate multiple linear regression modelling was used to identify factors associated with healthcare professional's rating of disfigurement and patient self-perceived body image. Disfigurement ratings by healthcare professionals were positively associated with patient self-perceived body image. Medical treatment, cancer stage, radiation dose and cancer site were significantly associated with disfigurement. Medical treatment was an important predictor of perceived body image. These findings indicate a moderate prevalence of disfigurement among women with HNCs. Patients with more disfigurement were more likely to have dissatisfaction with their body image. Nursing professionals need to carefully assess the appearance of women with HNC. Camouflage interventions can be used to help appropriately cope with the disfigurement, and to achieve improved satisfaction with their body image.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available