Sexual functioning is an important element of quality of life. Many women experience sexual problems as a result of a breast cancer diagnosis and its treatment. Little is known about the availability and the effectiveness of interventions for sexual problems in this patient population. Six electronic databases were searched using Medical Subject Headings and keywords. Additional hand searching of the references of relevant papers was also conducted. The searches were conducted between October 2010 and January 2011. Papers were included if they evaluated interventions for sexual problems caused as a result of breast cancer or its treatment. Studies were only included if sexual functioning was reported using a patient-reported outcome questionnaire. Studies were excluded if sexual functioning was measured but improving sexual problems was not one of the main aims of the intervention. 3514 papers were identified in the initial search. 21 papers were selected for inclusion. Studies were of mixed methodological quality; 15 randomised trials were identified, many included small sample sizes and the use of non-validated questionnaires. Three main types of interventions were identified: Exercise (2), medical (2) and psycho-educational (17). The psycho-educational interventions included skills-based training such as problem-solving and communication skills, counselling, hypnosis, education and specific sex-therapies. Interventions were delivered to individual patients, patients and their partners (couple-based) and groups of patients. The widespread methodological variability hinders the development of a coherent picture about which interventions work for whom. Tentative findings suggest the most effective interventions are couple-based psycho-educational interventions that include an element of sexual therapy. More methodologically strong research is needed before any intervention can be recommended for clinical practice. Improved screening and classification of sexual problems will ensure interventions can be more effectively targeted to suit individual patient needs.

BackgroundInformation and communication technology (ICT) systems are being developed for electronic symptom reporting across different stages of the cancer trajectory with research in palliative care at an early stage.Aim/designThis paper presents the first systematic search of the literature to review existing ICT systems intended to support management of pain in palliative care patients with cancer. The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Data sourcesFour databases (Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Healthcare Management Information Consortium) from 1990 to December 2012 were searched, with exclusion of papers based on their description of ICT systems and language used.Results24 articles met the inclusion criteria, many of which reported the use of non-experimental research designs. Studies were identified at different stages of development with no systems having reached implementation. Most systems captured pain as part of quality-of-life measurement with wide variation in approaches to pain assessment.ConclusionsICT systems for symptom reporting are emerging in the palliative care context. Future development of ICT systems need to increase the quality and scale of development work, consider how recommendations for pain measurement can be integrated and explore how to effectively use system feedback with patients.

Objectives The aim of this paper was to identify current barriers, facilitators and experiences of raising and discussing palliative care with people with advanced cancer. Methods Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with patients with advanced cancer and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Patients were included who had and had not been referred to palliative care. Transcripts were analysed using framework analysis. Results Twenty‐four patients and eight HCPs participated. Two overarching themes and five sub‐themes emerged: Theme one—referral process: timing and triggers, responsibility. Theme two—engagement: perception of treatment, prognosis and palliative care, psychological and emotional preparedness for discussion, and understanding how palliative care could benefit present and future care. Conclusion There is a need to identify suitable patients earlier in their cancer trajectory, address misconceptions about palliative care, treatment and prognosis, and better prepare patients and HCPs to have meaningful conversations about palliative care. Patients and HCPs need to establish and communicate the relevance of palliative care to the patient's current and future care, and be clear about the referral process.

Low prevalence of discussion of psychosocial issues cannot be accounted for by patient or clinician communication preferences. If clinicians rely on patients to initiate discussion of psychosocial issues, patients' problems may go unaddressed.