Background:Anxiety disorders pose serious public health problems.The data available on anxiety disorders in the transgender population is limited by the small numbers, the lack of a matched controlled population and the selection of a nonhomogenous group of transgender people.Aims:The aims of the study were(1)To determine anxiety symptomatology (based on the HADS) in a non-treated transgender population and to compare them to a general population sample matched by age and gender;(2)To investigate the predictive role of specific variables, including experienced gender, self-esteem, victimization, social support, interpersonal functioning and cross-sex hormone use regarding levels of anxiety symptomatology;(3)To investigate differences in anxiety symptomatology between transgender people on cross-sex hormone treatment and those who are not.Methods:A total of 913 individuals, who self-identified as transgender attending a transgender health service during a three-year period agreed participation. For the first aim of the study 592 transgender people not on treatment were matched by age and gender with 3816 people from the general population. For the second and third aim the whole transgender population was included. Measurements:Socio-demographic variables and measures of depression and anxiety(HADS), self-esteem(RSE), victimisation(ETS), social support(MSPSS), and interpersonal functioning(IIP-32).Results:Compared with the general population transgender people had a nearly 3-fold increased risk of probable anxiety disorder(all p < .05). Low self-esteem and interpersonal functioning were found to be significant predictors of anxiety symptoms. Trans women on treatment with cross-sex hormones were found to have lower levels of anxiety disorder symptomatology.Conclusions:Transgender people (particularly trans males) have higher levels of anxiety symptoms suggestive of possible anxiety disorders, when compared to the general population. The findings that self-esteem, interpersonal functioning and hormone treatment is associated with lower levels of anxiety symptoms indicate the need for clinical interventions targeting self-esteem and interpersonal difficulties as well as the importance of quick access to transgender health services.

No abstract

Objective Cervical cancer is predominantly a cancer of younger women, and improvements in oncological outcomes have led to an increase in cervical cancer survivors living with the long‐term effects of treatment. Understanding the recovery process after treatment is essential to increase awareness of the short‐ and long‐term needs of survivors. The aim of this study was to qualitatively explore the recovery process and return to daily activity of cervical cancers survivors from a biopsychosocial perspective. Methods Participants were 21 women treated for cervical cancer between the ages of 18 and 60 years, living in the United Kingdom. Interviews were undertaken face to face and via the telephone using a semi‐structured interview schedule. Results Data analysis revealed themes which represented participants' experience and perceptions of treatment as a paradox; emotional needs after treatment; and a journey of adversarial growth. A key finding from this analysis was the nuanced experiences between treatment modalities, with physical changes perceived to be more disruptive following radical treatments, whilst psychological repercussions were significant regardless of treatment type. Conclusion This study provides novel insight into the varied recovery experiences of those treated with surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer, which can be used to improve the survivorship experience.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to utilise the intervention mapping (IM) protocol as a framework with which to develop an intervention underpinned by relevant behaviour change theory to promote physical activity (PA) following treatment for cervical cancer. Methods The six steps of the IM protocol were followed. A qualitative semi-structured interview study and a rapid review of the literature were conducted along with the development of a logic model of the problem and a logic model of change to inform intervention development. Results An intervention was developed which aims to increase PA levels following treatment for cervical cancer, tailored to address key findings from the IM needs assessment. These include embedding behavioural and social strategies that help participants to overcome perceived barriers to PA participation; goal setting strategies to gradually increase PA levels with a view of reaching relevant PA guidelines for cancer survivors and feedback to encourage self-assessment of well-being and PA capability. Conclusion This study maps the development of a novel PA intervention for those who have been treated for cervical cancer. The use of a systematic development framework was necessary as little insight exists regarding PA preferences after treatment for cervical cancer. Implications for Cancer Survivors PA behaviour is associated with positive physical and psychological health outcomes for cancer survivors. Optimising targeted promotion of PA behaviour following treatment for cervical cancer may result in an enhanced survivorship experience through increased PA behaviour and improved quality of life (QOL).

Risk-stratified follow-up for endometrial cancer (EC) is being introduced in many cancer centres; however, there appears to be diversity in the structure and availability of schemes across the UK. This study aimed to investigate clinicians’ and clinical specialist nurses’ (CNS) experiences of follow-up schemes for EC, including patient-initiated follow-up (PIFU), telephone follow-up (TFU) and clinician-led hospital follow-up (HFU). A mixed-methods study was conducted, consisting of an online questionnaire to CNSs, an audience survey of participants attending a national “Personalising Endometrial Cancer Follow-up” educational meeting, and qualitative semi-structured telephone interviews with clinicians involved in the follow-up of EC. Thematic analysis identified three main themes to describe clinicians’ views: appropriate patient selection; changing from HFU to PIFU schemes; and the future of EC follow-up schemes. Many participants reported that the COVID-19 pandemic impacted EC follow-up by accelerating the transition to PIFU/TFU. Overall, there was increasing support for non-HFU schemes for patients who have completed primary treatment of EC; however, barriers were identified for non-English-speaking patients and those who had communication challenges. Given the good long-term outcome associated with EC, greater focus is needed to develop resources to support patients post-treatment and individualise follow-up according to patients’ personal needs and preferences.