4.5 Article

Patient-rating of distressful symptoms after treatment for early cervical cancer

Journal

ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
Volume 81, Issue 5, Pages 443-450

Publisher

BLACKWELL MUNKSGAARD
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0412.2002.810512.x

Keywords

cervical cancer; sexual dysfunction; lymphedema; urinary dysfunction; bowel dysfunction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. More refined information on sources of symptom-induced distress in a patient population can improve the quality of pretreatment information, make follow-up visits more efficient and guide research priorities in the efforts to modify treatments. Methods. In a population-based epidemiological study covering all of Sweden, data were collected 1996-97 by means of an anonymous postal questionnaire. We attempted to enroll all 332 patients with stage IB-IIA cervical cancer registered in 1991-92 at the seven departments of gynecological oncology in Sweden. Results. A total of 256 cases (77%) completed the questionnaire. After surgery, alone or in combination with intracavitary radiotherapy, several symptoms related to sexual dysfunction are the primary sources of symptom-induced distress reduced orgasm frequency: much distress 23% (surgery alone) and 23% (intracavitary radiotherapy and surgery), respectively, overall intercourse dysfunction: much distress 17% and 20%, respectively, followed by lymphedema (much distress 14% and 14%, respectively). Dyspareunia (much distress 24%) and defecation urgency (much distress 22%) are two leading causes of distress after surgery and external radiotherapy. After treatment with radiotherapy alone, loose stool and dyspareunia were the two most distressful symptoms (much distress 19% each). When a symptom occurs, fecal leakage and reduced orgasm frequency are the two most distressful ones (measured as much distress, 38% each). Conclusions. The observed symptoms are distressful and should, if one focuses on patient satisfaction, be given priority.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available