Life quality of endometrioid endometrial cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study

Karataşlı, Volkan; Can, Behzat; Çakır, İlker; Erkılınç, Selçuk; Kuru, Oğuzhan; Gökçü, Mehmet; Şancı, Muzaffer

doi:10.1080/01443615.2020.1787969

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Those have to be always administered in addition to the core questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) [34]. There are specific questionnaires on breast, cervical, endometrium, ovarian and vulva cancers as shown in Table 2 [12,13,15,35,36]. All of them are validated unless the vulva one which is in last stage of development.…”

Section: European Organization For Research and Treatment Of Cancer (Eortc)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Health related quality of life scales in women diagnosed with gynecological and breast cancer: the role of resilience. A systematic review

2021

EJGO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resilience and health-related quality of life are factors to be valued today in all types of patients for their relationship to wellbeing and health. Any stressful situation can significantly impact quality of life and resilience and there are numerous scales to rate these aspects. The main objective of this review is to describe the most used health-related quality of life and resilience scales in gynecological and breast cancer patients to highlight the limitations. Data sources: A review of literature in Pubmed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database and Google Scholar was carried out to identify articles on health-related quality of life in oncological patients published in English between 2000 and 2020. Methods of study selection: The review was done following the PRISMA guidelines. Tabulation: A total of 460 papers were identified using MeSH terms but finally, according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we evaluated 41. Integration and results: Questionnaires have a good performance to quantify quality of life and resilience in oncological patients in general. However, most publications were not focused on patients with gynecological cancer. Conclusions: Due to the particularities of the group of patients with gynecologic and breast cancer secondary to their treatment significantly affecting several areas and domains, it is necessary to validate specific scales for them in order to offer these patients the correct management of their disease at all levels. The role of resilience, premature and iatrogenic menopause and mutilating surgeries are essential to understand the uniqueness of health-related quality of life in gynecological and breast cancer patients.

show abstract

Section: European Organization For Research and Treatment Of Cancer (Eortc)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Health related quality of life scales in women diagnosed with gynecological and breast cancer: the role of resilience. A systematic review

2021

EJGO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The included studies tended to have a high risk of bias based on the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale criteria. The average number of stars awarded for cohort studies ( n = 3) was 5.3 out of 9 (range: 4–6) (Donkers et al, 2019; Garcia et al, 2018; Segal et al, 2017) while the average number of stars awarded for cross‐sectional studies ( n = 8) was 3.3 out of 10 (range: 1–7) (Armbruster et al, 2016; Barnes et al, 2018; Dahl et al, 2020; Karataşlı et al, 2021; Lajtman, 2019; Mikkelsen et al, 2017; Smits, Smits, et al, 2015; Stukan et al, 2018). Particularly, four studies (Armbruster et al, 2016; Barnes et al, 2018; Lajtman, 2019; Stukan et al, 2018) provided low‐quality data (i.e., the number of starts ≤ 2) and required a more cautious interpretation of the findings.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All studies measured obesity using BMI (Table 2). Two studies used body weight and height measured by research staff (Karataşlı et al, 2021) or extracted from medical records (Garcia et al, 2018). The other studies used self‐reports ( n = 5) or did not clearly provide the measurement procedure ( n = 4).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 3 presents specific SHOs measured by individual studies. Sexual functioning was most commonly measured in the included studies ( n = 6), but its definition varied across studies by the instrument (Armbruster et al, 2016; Donkers et al, 2019; Garcia et al, 2018; Karataşlı et al, 2021; Segal et al, 2017; Smits, Smits, et al, 2015). Only Segal et al (2017) considered partners’ sexual function to accurately assess patients’ own issues specific to sexual function using PISQ‐12.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The included studies tended to have a high risk of bias based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria. The average number of stars awarded for cohort studies (n = 3) was 5.3 out of 9 (range: 4-6) (Donkers et al, 2019;Garcia et al, 2018;Segal et al, 2017) while the average number of stars awarded for cross-sectional studies (n = 8) was 3.3 out of 10 (range: 1-7) (Armbruster et al, 2016;Barnes et al, 2018;Dahl et al, 2020;Karataşlı et al, 2021;Lajtman, 2019;Mikkelsen et al, 2017;Stukan et al, 2018).…”

Section: Quality Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Obesity and patient‐reported sexual health outcomes in gynecologic cancer survivors: A systematic review

Lee

Reilly

Bruner

et al. 2022

Research in Nursing & Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As obesity prevalence among gynecologic cancer (GC) survivors is expected to increase, the role of obesity in sexual health needs to be understood. This systematic review examined the impact of obesity on patient‐reported sexual health outcomes (SHOs) in this population. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched for original studies published between 2015 and 2020 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analyses guideline. We performed a narrative synthesis of findings via cancer type, cancer treatment, sexual health measures, and countries. Eleven observational studies were included. Most were conducted in European countries (n = 7), reported on endometrial cancer survivors (n = 7), and defined obesity as body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 (n = 10). Studies about cervical cancer survivors reported negative effects of obesity on sexual activity and body image while studies about endometrial cancer survivors reported positive effects of obesity on vaginal/sexual symptoms. Findings suggested interaction effects of radiotherapy and obesity on SHOs. Sexual functioning measured by the Female Sexual Function Index was less likely to be associated with obesity than other SHOs. A positive effect of obesity on SHOs was only found in studies conducted in European countries. Current evidence on the association between obesity and sexual health in GC survivors lacks in both quantity and quality. To better understand the effect of obesity on SHOs in the population, more studies are needed with critical evaluations of obesity and sexual health measures, careful considerations of cancer type and treatment, and a focus on the cultural context of obesity.

show abstract

Sexual Quality of Life and Sexual Problems of Women with Gynecological Cancer: Evaluation According to Treatment Methods and Cancer Types

Delican,

Güngörmüş

2023

Sex Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Life quality of endometrioid endometrial cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study

Cited by 5 publications

References 23 publications

Health related quality of life scales in women diagnosed with gynecological and breast cancer: the role of resilience. A systematic review

Health related quality of life scales in women diagnosed with gynecological and breast cancer: the role of resilience. A systematic review

Obesity and patient‐reported sexual health outcomes in gynecologic cancer survivors: A systematic review

Sexual Quality of Life and Sexual Problems of Women with Gynecological Cancer: Evaluation According to Treatment Methods and Cancer Types

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About