Advertisement

Pilot Study to Assess the Feasibility of Using Sexual Function and Vaginal Changes Questionnaire in Gynaecological Cancer Survivors

  • Sampada Dessai
  • Amita Maheshwari
Original Article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

Introduction

Sexual quality of life is an important aspect of quality of life (QOL) parameter for cancer survivors. Sexual and vaginal function assessment is a neglected aspect in EORTC questionnaire. Recently a questionnaire assessing this aspect has been developed. However, before widespread use of such a questionnaire a feasibility study is warranted.

Aims and objectives

The aim of the study was to see the feasibility of using sexual function and vaginal changes questionnaires (SVQ) in Indian gynaecological cancer survivors. The primary objective of study was to see the completion rates of SVQ. Secondary objective was to study the face value, feasibility and utility of SVQ and to suggest any modifications required for it to be used in Indian population.

Methodology

This was a pilot study which included fifteen gynaecological cancer survivors. The patients were self-administered SVQ for evaluating sexual and vaginal dysfunction. A separate questionnaire QQ10 was then administered for evaluation of the feasibility of using SVQ. Descriptive statistics was used to calculate the percentage completion rate for SVQ.

Results

There was a high completion rate (98.24%) of SVQ, and the QQ-10 tool showed that it was feasible to administer the test in Indian population.

Conclusion

The study suggests that vaginal and sexual dysfunctions can be successfully assessed by SVQ in Indian gynaecological cancer survivors. A large study is warranted to further evaluate the SVQ applicability in our country.

Keywords

Sexual Vaginal Dysfunction SVQ Questionnaire Gynaecological cancer 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

40944_2018_238_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (82 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 81 kb)
40944_2018_238_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (24 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 23 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Chan YM, Ngan HYS, Li BYG, Yip AMW, Ng TY, Lee PWH, et al. A longitudinal study on quality of life after gynaecologic cancer treatment. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;83(1):10–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ersek M, Ferrell BR, Dow KH, Melancon CH. Quality of life in women with ovarian cancer. West J Nurs Res. 1997;19(3):334–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Greimel E, Thiel I, Peintinger F, Cegnar I, Pongratz E. Prospective assessment of quality of life of female cancer patients. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;85(1):140.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jones GL, Ledger W, Bonnett TJ, Radley S, Parkinson N, Kennedy SH. The impact of treatment for gynecological cancer on health-related quality of life (HRQoL): a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(1):26–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jensen PT, Groenvold M, Klee MC, Thranov I, Petersen MA, Machin D. Early-stage cervical carcinoma, radical hysterectomy, and sexual function. Cancer. 2004;100(1):97–106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jensen PT, Klee MC, Thranov I, Groenvold M. Validation of a questionnaire for self-assessment of sexual function and vaginal changes after gynaecological cancer. Psychooncology. 2004;13(8):577–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Agarwal S, Malhotra KP, Sinha S, Rajaram S. Profile of gynaecologic malignancies reported at a tertiary care centre in India over the past decade: comparative evaluation with international data. Indian J Cancer. 2012;49(3):298.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sankaranarayanan R, Ferlay J. Worldwide burden of gynecological cancer. In Handbook of Disease Burdens and Quality of Life Measures 2010 (pp. 803–823). Springer. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-0-387-78665-0_46.
  9. 9.
    Sarkar M, Konar H, Raut DK. Gynecological malignancies: epidemiological characteristics of the patients in a tertiary care hospital in India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2012;13:2997–3004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moores KL, Jones GL, Radley SC. Development of an instrument to measure face validity, feasibility and utility of patient questionnaire use during health care: the QQ-10. Int J Qual Heal Care. 2012;24(5):517–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Osoba D. Lessons learned from measuring health-related quality of life in oncology. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12(3):608–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Osoba D, Zee B. Completion rates in health-related quality-of-life assessment: approach of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Stat Med. 1998;17(5–7):603–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Greimel ER, Kuljanic Vlasic K, Waldenstrom A-C, Duric VM, Jensen PT, Singer S, et al. The European organization for research and treatment of cancer (EORTC) quality-of-life questionnaire cervical cancer module. Cancer. 2006;107(8):1812–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Osoba D, Bezjak A, Brundage M, Zee B, Tu D, Pater J. Analysis and interpretation of health-related quality-of-life data from clinical trials: basic approach of The National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41(2):280–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Gynecologic Oncologists of India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.HN Reliance Foundation HospitalGirgoanIndia
  2. 2.Tata Memorial HospitalParelIndia

Personalised recommendations