4.3 Article

Pain and Loss of Pleasure in Receptive Anal Sex for Gay and Bisexual Men following Prostate Cancer Treatment: Results from the Restore-1 Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEX RESEARCH
卷 59, 期 7, 页码 826-833

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2021.1939846

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute [5R21CA182041-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that nearly half of gay and bisexual men were more likely to engage in receptive anal intercourse in long-term relationships, and it was also associated with other sexual behaviors such as oral and insertive anal sex. Anodyspareunia occurred in approximately 23% of men who recently attempted receptive anal intercourse, and this pain was negatively associated with mental health, performing oral sex on a partner, and bowel function.
Prostate cancer treatments disrupt receptive anal intercourse (RAI) for gay and bisexual men (GBM). Sexual dysfunction following prostate cancer treatment may include severe pain in the anorectum during RAI (i.e., anodyspareunia). The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of prostate cancer and its treatments on RAI among GBM. Data were from a cross-sectional online survey of 100 GBM prostate cancer survivors who reported pleasurable RAI prior to treatment. Approximately 47% of the sample reported recent RAI, which was more common among GBM in long-term relationships. RAI was also associated with engagement in other sexual behaviors (e.g., oral and insertive anal sex). Anodyspareunia was reported by 23% of the men who had attempted recent RAI. Anodyspareunia was negatively associated with mental health, performing oral sex on a partner, and bowel function. The overwhelming majority received no information from their healthcare providers about loss of RAI function prior to prostate cancer treatment. Culturally responsive cancer survivorship care may need to address the loss of RAI function for GBM prostate cancer survivors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据