Oncologists' use of patient educational materials about cancer and fertility preservation

Quinn, Gwendolyn P.; Vadaparampil, Susan T.; Malo, Teri L.; Reinecke, Joyce; Bower, Bethanne; Albrecht, Terrance L.; Clayman, Marla L.

doi:10.1002/pon.2022

Cited by 35 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Half of physicians and advanced practice nurses reported using fertility educational materials “usually” to “always”; however, the adult language, adult content, and overall reading level were a shortcoming of this material when supplied to young patients of reproductive age . A second study reported that only 13.6% of oncologists “always” to “often” give patients educational materials about fertility preservation, while the majority (60.2%) reported “rarely” to “never” providing written materials . Some health care professionals reported asking patients if they wanted additional, more specific or written information, or to speak with someone else; however, most clinicians preferred face‐to‐face over written information …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, the extent or quality of these discussions was often unclear, lacked a systematic process for being recorded, and the focus of discussions was on practical rather than emotional issues . In addition, despite guidelines advocating for the provision of written fertility information to assist fertility discussions, the majority of oncologists rarely offer this material to patients and the information that is provided is often not age appropriate …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…43 Four studies reported on clinicians' use of written materials when informing patients of fertility or fertility preservation. 17,44,46,47 Half of physicians and advanced practice nurses reported using fertility educational materials "usually" to "always"; however, the adult language, adult content, and overall reading level were a shortcoming of this material when supplied to young patients of reproductive age. 46 A second study reported that only 13.6% of oncologists "always" to "often"…”

Section: Oncofertility Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Speciality in surgery, orthopaedic oncology or radiology, larger practice size, and being unaware of guidelines were associated with greater odds of “rarely/never” providing written materials …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Clinician provision of oncofertility support in cancer patients of a reproductive age: A systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oncofertility support is often not delivered to the standard of current guidelines, with many clinicians not providing the recommended care to all eligible patients, and as such many patients may lack the oncofertility support that they require. The implementation of a clear procedural process would assist clinicians in the provision of oncofertility support for cancer patients of reproductive age.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Oncofertility Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Clinician provision of oncofertility support in cancer patients of a reproductive age: A systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2010, 2013, Gracia & Woodruff 2012, Murphy et al . 2012, Quinn et al . 2012, Quinn & Vadaparampil 2013, Duncan et al .…”

Section: Fertility Preservation Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oncofertility: a grand collaboration between reproductive medicine and oncology

Woodruff¹

2015

Reproduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2007, I was asked by the University of Calgary to participate in a symposium called ‘Pushing the Boundaries – Advances that Will Change the World in 20 Years’. My topic was oncofertility, a word I had just coined to describe the intersection of two disciplines – oncology and fertility – and I was thrilled to share my passion for this new field and help young women with cancer protect their future reproductive health. Fertility preservation in the cancer setting lacked a concerted effort to bridge the disciplines in an organized manner. In early 2015, I was delighted to deliver a presentation for the Society for Reproduction and Fertility titled ‘Sex in Three Cities’, where I gave an update on the oncofertility movement, a remarkable cross-disciplinary, global collaboration created to address the fertility preservation needs of young cancer patients. During my tour of the UK, I was impressed by the interest among the society and its members to engage colleagues outside the discipline as well as the public in a dialogue about cutting-edge reproductive science. In this invited review, I will describe the work of the Oncofertility Consortium to provide fertility preservation options in the cancer setting and accelerate the acceptance of this critical topic on a global scale. I hope that one day this word and field it created will change the world for women who had been left out of the equation for far too long.

show abstract

Fertility preservation in male adolescents with cancer (2011–2020): A retrospective study in China

Liu,

Wang,

Zhu

et al. 2024

Cancer Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAccording to the studies, more than 80% of pediatric patients with cancer can achieve a survival rate greater than 5 years; however, long‐term chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy may seriously affect their reproductive ability. Fertility preservation in adolescents with cancer in China was initiated late, and related research is lacking. Analyze data to understand the current situation and implement measures to improve current practices.MethodsFrom 2011 to 2020, data on 275 male adolescents with cancer whose age ranged from 0 to 19 years old were collected from 16 human sperm banks for this retrospective study. Methods include comparing the basic situation of male adolescents with cancer, the distribution of cancer types, and semen quality to analyze the status of fertility preservation.ResultsThe mean age was 17.39 ± 1.46 years, with 13 cases (4.7%) aged 13–14 years and 262 cases (95.3%) aged 15–19 years. Basic diagnoses included leukemia (55 patients), lymphomas (76), germ cell and gonadal tumors (65), epithelial tumors (37), soft tissue sarcomas (14), osteosarcoma (7), brain tumors (5), and other cancers (16). There are differences in tumor types in different age stages and regions. The tumor type often affects semen quality, while age affects semen volume. Significant differences were found in sperm concentration and progressive motility before and after treatment (p < 0.001). Moreover, 90.5% of patients had sperm in their semen and sperm were frozen successfully in 244 patients (88.7%).ConclusionsThe aim of this study is to raise awareness of fertility preservation in male adolescents with cancer, to advocate for fertility preservation prior to gonadotoxic therapy or other procedures that may impair future fertility, and to improve the fertility status of future patients.

show abstract

Oncologists' use of patient educational materials about cancer and fertility preservation

Cited by 35 publications

References 20 publications

Clinician provision of oncofertility support in cancer patients of a reproductive age: A systematic review

Clinician provision of oncofertility support in cancer patients of a reproductive age: A systematic review

Oncofertility: a grand collaboration between reproductive medicine and oncology

Fertility preservation in male adolescents with cancer (2011–2020): A retrospective study in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About