Objectives: To explore the drives, manifestations and coping strategies of stigma in postoperative oral cancer patients to provide a reference for the formulation of targeted intervention measures.Methods: Using a phenomenological approach, we enrolled 15 postoperative oral cancer patients in a certain Grade a hospital from 10 March 2021 to 30 June 2021 in Hunan Province, China. Semi-structured interviews were conducted. The interview data were analyzed using a framework analysis based on qualitative content analysis methods. This study aligns with the COREQ checklist.Results: The stigma experience of postoperative oral cancer patients can be divided into 3 themes: (1) drivers (internal factors and external factors); (2) manifestations (isolation, feeling of guilt, feeling of inferiority and the experience of discrimination); (3) coping strategies (self-adjustment, seeking social support and enhance physical quality).Conclusion: Postoperative oral cancer patients lived with mask and guilt, and experienced multiple forms of discrimination. Further work is needed to increase education and awareness about oral cancer to guide them to take positive coping and reduce stigma.

Purpose To examine the level of stigma and identify its influencing factors among postoperative oral cancer patients in China. Methods In total, 274 postoperative oral cancer patients were recruited from a Grade A Tertiary Hospital in China using convenience sampling methods. Patients completed the Social Impact Scale (SIS), Medical Coping Mode Questionnaire (MCMQ), Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS), and General Self-efficacy Scale (GSE). Results Stigma reported by postoperative oral cancer patients was moderate (50.17±21.24). Stepped Multiple Linear Regression showed that the related factors influencing their feelings of stigma were education level (β = -0.122, P<0.001), smoking (β = -0.140, P<0.001), betel-quid chewing (β = -0.136, P<0.001), type of oral cancer (β = -0.399, P<0.001), pathology type (β = -0.077, P<0.001), confrontation (β = 0.116, P<0.001), avoidance (β = 0.136, P<0.001), and self-efficacy (βv= -0.282, P<0.001), which explained 70.3% of the total variation in stigma (F = 81.829, P<0.001). Conclusions Stigma was positively predicted by avoidance coping strategies, but negatively predicted by education level, smoking, betel-quid chewing, type of oral cancer, pathology type, confronting coping strategies, and self-efficacy. Further work should focus on developing interventions to reduce stigma by improving protective factors and decreasing risk factors.