Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Gynecologic Cancer | Study protocol

Opening the Conversation: study protocol for a Phase III trial to evaluate a couple-based intervention to reduce reproductive and sexual distress among young adult breast and gynecologic cancer survivor couples

Authors: Jessica R. Gorman, Karen S. Lyons, S. Marie Harvey, Chiara Acquati, John M. Salsman, Deborah A. Kashy, Julia H. Drizin, Ellie Smith, Lisa M. Flexner, Brandon Hayes-Lattin, Jennifer B. Reese

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Reproductive and sexual health (RSH) concerns are common and distressing for young adults diagnosed with breast and gynecologic cancer and their partners. This study evaluates the efficacy of a virtual couple-based intervention called Opening the Conversation (OC). The OC intervention is grounded in theory and evidence-based practice and was adapted to improve coping and communication specifically in relation to RSH concerns after cancer.

Methods

This Phase III trial is conducted in a fully remote setting and enrolls young adult couples (current age 18–44 years) with a history of breast or gynecologic cancer (stage 1–4, diagnosed under age 40) within the past 6 months to 5 years. Eligible dyads are recruited from across the USA. The target sample size is 100 couples. Dyads are randomly assigned to receive either the 5-session OC intervention or a 4-session active control intervention (Side by Side). The primary outcomes are change in reproductive distress and sexual distress. Secondary outcomes include communication about reproductive concerns, communication about sexual concerns, depressive symptoms, sexual function, relationship quality, relationship intimacy, sexual satisfaction, self-efficacy to communicate about sex and intimacy, and quality of life. An exploratory aim examines whether dyadic coping and communication quality mediate intervention effects on survivors’ and partners’ reproductive distress or sexual distress. Self-report outcome measures are assessed for both groups at baseline (T1), 2 weeks post-treatment (T2), and 3 months post-treatment (T3).

Discussion

Despite the importance of RSH for quality of life for young adult cancer survivors and their partners, evidence-based interventions that help couples navigate RSH concerns are lacking. This randomized controlled trial will determine the efficacy of a novel couple-based intervention to reduce distress related to RSH concerns for younger couples after breast or gynecologic cancer, in comparison to an active control intervention.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.​gov NCT04806724. Registered on Mar 19, 2021.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Miller KD, Fidler-Benaoudia M, Keegan TH, Hipp HS, Jemal A, Siegel RL. Cancer statistics for adolescents and young adults, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020;70(6):443–59.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Murphy BL, Day CN, Hoskin TL, Habermann EB, Boughey JC. Adolescents and young adults with breast cancer have more aggressive disease and treatment than patients in their forties. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(12):3920–30.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Warner EL, Kent EE, Trevino KM, Parsons HM, Zebrack BJ, Kirchhoff AC. Social well-being among adolescents and young adults with cancer: a systematic review. Cancer. 2016;122(7):1029–37.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Barnett M, McDonnell G, DeRosa A, Schuler T, Philip E, Peterson L, et al. Psychosocial outcomes and interventions among cancer survivors diagnosed during adolescence and young adulthood (AYA): a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(5):814–31.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
Schover LR, van der Kaaij M, van Dorst E, Creutzberg C, Huyghe E, Kiserud CE. Sexual dysfunction and infertility as late effects of cancer treatment. EJC Suppl. 2014;12(1):41–53.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
6.
Vaz AF, Pinto-Neto AM, Conde DM, Costa-Paiva L, Morais SS, Pedro AO, et al. Quality of life and menopausal and sexual symptoms in gynecologic cancer survivors: a cohort study. Menopause. 2011;18(6):662–9.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Karabulut N, Erci B. Sexual desire and satisfaction in sexual life affecting factors in breast cancer survivors after mastectomy. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2009;27(3):332–43.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Fobair P, Hoppe RT, Bloom J, Cox R, Varghese A, Spiegel D. Psychosocial problems among survivors of Hodgkin’s disease. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4(5):805–14.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Robinson L, Miedema B, Easley J. Young adult cancer survivors and the challenges of intimacy. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2014;32(4):447–62.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Bradford A, Fellman B, Urbauer D, Gallegos J, Meaders K, Tung C, et al. Assessment of sexual activity and dysfunction in medically underserved women with gynecologic cancers. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;139(1):134–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
Grover S, Hill-Kayser CE, Vachani C, Hampshire MK, DiLullo GA, Metz JM. Patient reported late effects of gynecological cancer treatment. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;124(3):399–403.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Carter J, Chi DS, Brown CL, Abu-Rustum NR, Sonoda Y, Aghajanian C, et al. Cancer-related infertility in survivorship. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20(1):2–8.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Levin AO, Carpenter KM, Fowler JM, Brothers BM, Andersen BL, Maxwell GL. Sexual morbidity associated with poorer psychological adjustment among gynecological cancer survivors. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20(3):461–70.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Robertson EG, Sansom-Daly UM, Wakefield CE, Ellis SJ, McGill BC, Doolan EL, et al. Sexual and romantic relationships: experiences of adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2016;5(3):286–91.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Ljungman L, Ahlgren J, Petersson LM, Flynn KE, Weinfurt K, Gorman JR, et al. Sexual dysfunction and reproductive concerns in young women with breast cancer: type, prevalence, and predictors of problems. Psychooncology. 2018;27(12):2770–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
16.
Wettergren L, Kent EE, Mitchell SA, Zebrack B, Lynch CF, Rubenstein MB, et al. Cancer negatively impacts on sexual function in adolescents and young adults: the AYA HOPE study. Psychooncology. 2017;26(10):1632–9.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Jing L, Zhang C, Li W, Jin F, Wang A. Incidence and severity of sexual dysfunction among women with breast cancer: a meta-analysis based on female sexual function index. Support Care Cancer. 2019;27(4):1171–80.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Olsson M, Steineck G, Enskär K, Wilderäng U, Jarfelt M. Sexual function in adolescent and young adult cancer survivors-a population-based study. J Cancer Surviv. 2018;12(4):450–9.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Olsson M, Enskär K, Steineck G, Wilderäng U, Jarfelt M. Self-perceived physical attractiveness in relation to scars among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors: a population-based study. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2018;7(3):358–66.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Arndt V, Merx H, Sturmer T, Stegmaier C, Ziegler H, Brenner H. Age-specific detriments to quality of life among breast cancer patients one year after diagnosis. Eur J Cancer Care. 2004;40(5):673–80.CrossRef
21.
Bidstrup PE, Christensen J, Mertz BG, Rottmann N, Dalton SO, Johansen C. Trajectories of distress, anxiety, and depression among women with breast cancer: Looking beyond the mean. Acta Oncol. 2015;54(5):789–96.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Acquati C, Kayser K. Dyadic coping across the lifespan: a comparison between younger and middle-aged couples with breast cancer. Front Psychol. 2019;10:404.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
Geue K, Schmidt R, Sender A, Sauter S, Friedrich M. Sexuality and romantic relationships in young adult cancer survivors: satisfaction and supportive care needs. Psychooncology. 2015;24(11):1368–76.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Li M, Chan CWH, Chow KM, Xiao J, Choi KC. A systematic review and meta-analysis of couple-based intervention on sexuality and the quality of life of cancer patients and their partners. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(4):1607–30.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Seay J, Mitteldorf D, Yankie A, Pirl WF, Kobetz E, Schlumbrecht MP. Survivorship care needs among LGBT cancer survivors. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2018;36(4):393–405.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Brown MT, McElroy JA. Unmet support needs of sexual and gender minority breast cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer. 2018;26(4):1189–96.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Hulbert-Williams NJ, Plumpton CO, Flowers P, et al. The cancer care experiences of gay, lesbian and bisexual patients: A secondary analysis of data from the UK Cancer Patient Experience Survey. Eur J Cancer Care. 2017;26(4):e12670. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​ecc.​12670.
28.
Boehmer U, Glickman M, Winter M, Clark MA. Long-term breast cancer survivors’ symptoms and morbidity: differences by sexual orientation? J Cancer Surviv. 2013;7(2):203–10.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Regan TW, Lambert SD, Girgis A, Kelly B, Kayser K, Turner J. Do couple-based interventions make a difference for couples affected by cancer? A systematic review. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:279.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
Fredman SJ, Baucom DH, Gremore TM, Castellani AM, Kallman TA, Porter LS, et al. Quantifying the recruitment challenges with couple-based interventions for cancer: applications to early-stage breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2009;18(6):667–73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
Traa MJ, De Vries J, Bodenmann G, Den Oudsten BL. Dyadic coping and relationship functioning in couples coping with cancer: a systematic review. Br J Health Psychol. 2015;20(1):85–114.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Badr H, Krebs P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions for couples coping with cancer. Psychooncology. 2013;22(8):1688–704.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Scott JL, Kayser K. A review of couple-based interventions for enhancing women's sexual adjustment and body image after cancer. Cancer J. 2009;15(1):48–56.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Epstein N, Baucom DH. Enhanced cognitive-behavioral therapy for couples: a contextual approach. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2002.CrossRef
35.
Gorman JR, Smith E, Drizin JH, Lyons KS, Harvey SM. Navigating sexual health in cancer survivorship: a dyadic perspective. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:5429–39.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Bodenmann G, Pihet S, Kayser K. The relationship between dyadic coping and marital quality: a 2-year longitudinal study. J Fam Psychol. 2006;20(3):485–93.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping and its significance for marital functioning. 2005. In: Ravenson TA, Kayser K, Bodnemann G, editors. Couples copign with stress: emerging persepctives on dyadic coping. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2005. p. 33–49.CrossRef
38.
Badr H. New frontiers in couple-based interventions in cancer care: refining the prescription for spousal communication. Acta Oncol. 2017;56(2):139–45.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Otto AK, Ketcher D, Heyman RE, Vadaparampil ST, Ellington L, Reblin M. Communication between advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers: relationship with caregiver burden and preparedness for caregiving. Health Commun. 2021;36(6):714–21.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Hawkey A, Ussher JM, Perz J, Parton C. Talking but not always understanding: couple communication about infertility concerns after cancer. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):161.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
Dryden A, Ussher JM, Perz J. Young women’s construction of their post-cancer fertility. Psychol Health. 2014;29(11):1341–60.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Lehmann V, Nahata L, Ferrante AC, Hansen-Moore JA, Yeager ND, Klosky JL, et al. Fertility-related perceptions and impact on romantic relationships among adult survivors of childhood cancer. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2018;7(4):409–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
43.
Hummel SB, van Lankveld JJDM, Oldenburg HSA, Hahn DEE, Kieffer JM, Gerritsma MA, et al. Efficacy of internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy in improving sexual functioning of breast cancer survivors: results of a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(12):1328–40.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Schover LR, Yuan Y, Fellman BM, Odensky E, Lewis PE, Martinetti P. Efficacy trial of an internet-based intervention for cancer-related female sexual dysfunction. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2013;11(11):1389–97.CrossRef
45.
Carroll AJ, Baron SR, Carroll RA. Couple-based treatment for sexual problems following breast cancer: a review and synthesis of the literature. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(8):3651–9.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Porter LS, Keefe FJ, Baucom DH, Olsen M, Zafar SY, Uronis H. A randomized pilot trial of a videoconference couples communication intervention for advanced GI cancer. Psychooncology. 2017;26(7):1027–35.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Richardson LK, Frueh BC, Grubaugh AL, Egede L, Elhai JD. Current directions in videoconferencing tele-mental health research. Clin Psychol Sci Pr. 2009;16(3):323–38.CrossRef
48.
Rupert DJ, Poehlman JA, Hayes JJ, Ray SE, Moultrie RR. Virtual versus in-person focus groups: comparison of costs, recruitment, and participant logistics. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(3):e80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Heinrichs N, Zimmermann T, Huber B, Herschbach P, Russell DW, Baucom DH. Cancer distress reduction with a couple-based skills training: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Behav Med. 2012;43(2):239–52.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Bodenmann G, Shantinath SD. The Couples Coping Enhancement Training (CCET): a new approach to prevention of marital distress based upon stress and coping. Fam Relat. 2004;53(5):477–84.CrossRef
51.
Bodenmann G, Randall AK, Falconier MK. Coping in couples: the Systemic Transactional Model (STM). In: Falconier MK, Randall AK, Bodenmann G, editors. Couples coping with stress: a cross-cultural perspective. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; 2016. p. 5–22.
52.
Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping: a systemic-transactional view of stress and coping among couples: Theory and empirical findings. Eur Rev Appl Psychol. 1997;47(2):137–41.
53.
Bodenmann G. A systemic-transactional conceptualization of stress and coping in couples. Swiss J Psychol. 1995;54(1):34–49.
54.
Scott JL, Halford WK, Ward BG. United we stand? The effects of a couple-coping intervention on adjustment to early stage breast or gynecological cancer. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004;72(6):1122–35.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Zimmermann T, Heinrichs N, Scott JL. CanCOPE “Schritt für Schritt”: Die Effektivität eines partnerschaftlichen Unterstützungsprogramms bei Frauen mit Brust- oder gynäkologischen Krebserkrankungen. [CanCOPE ‘Step by Step’: the effectiveness of a couple-based intervention program for women with breast or gynecological cancer]. Verhaltenstherapie. 2006;16(4):247–55.CrossRef
56.
Gorman JR, Lyons KS, Reese JB, Acquati C, Smith E, Drizin JH, et al. Adapting a theory-informed intervention to help young adult couples cope with reproductive and sexual concerns after cancer. Front Psychol. 2022;13:813548.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
57.
Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gøtzsche PC, Krleža-Jerić K, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):200–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
58.
59.
Armuand GM, Wettergren L, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Lampic C. Desire for children, difficulties achieving a pregnancy, and infertility distress 3 to 7 years after cancer diagnosis. Support Care Cancer. 2014;22(10):2805–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
60.
Moura-Ramos M, Gameiro S, Canavarro MC, Soares I. Assessing infertility stress: re-examining the factor structure of the Fertility Problem Inventory. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(2):496–505.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Newton CR, Sherrard W, Glavac I. The Fertility Problem Inventory: measuring perceived infertility-related stress. Fertil Steril. 1999;72(1):54–62.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Frost R, Donovan C. The development and validation of the Sexual and Relationship Distress Scale. J Sex Med. 2018;15(8):1167–79.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Arden-Close E, Moss-Morris R, Dennison L, Bayne L, Gidron Y. The Couples’ Illness Communication Scale (CICS): development and evaluation of a brief measure assessing illness-related couple communication. Br J Health Psychol. 2010;15(Pt 3):543–59.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Kroenke K, Strine TW, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Berry JT, Mokdad AH. The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2009;114(1-3):163–73.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Arthur EK, Wills CE, Browning K, Overcash J, Menon U. The Self-Efficacy to Communicate about Sex and Intimacy (SECSI) scale: psychometric assessment in women treated for cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(3):1449–57.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Wiegel M, Meston C, Rosen R. The female sexual function index (FSFI): cross-validation and development of clinical cutoff scores. J Sex Marital Ther. 2005;31(1):1–20.PubMedCrossRef
67.
Baser RE, Li Y, Carter J. Psychometric validation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in cancer survivors. Cancer. 2012;118(18):4606–18.PubMedCrossRef
68.
Rosen RC, Cappelleri JC, Gendrano N 3rd. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): a state-of-the-science review. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14(4):226–44.PubMedCrossRef
69.
Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S, Meston C, Shabsigh R, et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2000;26(2):191–208.PubMedCrossRef
70.
Hunsley J, Best M, Lefebvre M, Vito D. The seven-item short form of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale: further evidence for construct validity. Am J Fam Ther. 2001;29(4):325–35.CrossRef
71.
Hendrick SS. A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. J Marriage Fam. 1988;50(1):93–8.CrossRef
72.
Sharpley CF, Rogers HJ. Preliminary validation of the Abbreviated Spanier Dyadic Adjustment Scale - some psychometric data regarding a screening-test of marital adjustment. Educ Psychol Meas. 1984;44(4):1045–50.CrossRef
73.
74.
Mark KP, Herbenick D, Fortenberry JD, Sanders S, Reece M. A psychometric comparison of three scales and a single-item measure to assess sexual satisfaction. J Sex Res. 2014;51(2):159–69.PubMedCrossRef
75.
Lawrance K-aG, Byers ES. Development of the interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction in long term relationships. Can J Hum Sex. 1992;1:123–8.
76.
Hays RD, Bjorner JB, Revicki DA, Spritzer KL, Cella D. Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(7):873–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
77.
Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, et al. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(11):1179–94.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
78.
Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping and the significance of this concept for prevention and therapy. Z Gesundheitspsychol. 2008;16(3):108–11.CrossRef
79.
Randall AK, Hilpert P, Jimenez-Arista LE, Walsh KJ, Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping in the US: psychometric properties and validity for use of the English Version of the Dyadic Coping Inventory. Curr Psychol. 2016;35(4):570–82.CrossRef
80.
Futris TG, Campbell K, Nielsen RB, Burwell SR. The Communication Patterns Questionnaire-Short Form: a review and assessment. Fam J. 2010;18(3):275–87.CrossRef
81.
Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick C, Powell BJ, Dorsey CN, Clary AS, et al. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):108.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
82.
83.
Gorman JR, Drizin JH, Smith E, Flores-Sanchez Y, Harvey SM. Patient-centered communication to address young adult breast cancer survivors’ reproductive and sexual health concerns. Health Commun. 2021;36(13):1743–58.PubMedCrossRef
84.
Keesing S, Rosenwax L, McNamara B. A dyadic approach to understanding the impact of breast cancer on relationships between partners during early survivorship. BMC Womens Health. 2016;16(1):57.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
85.
Hawkey AJ, Ussher JM, Perz J, Parton C, Patterson P, Bateson D, et al. The impact of cancer-related fertility concerns on current and future couple relationships: People with cancer and partner perspectives. Eur J Cancer Care. 2021;30(1):e13348.CrossRef
86.
Luk BHK, Loke AY. Sexual satisfaction, intimacy and relationship of couples undergoing infertility treatment. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2019;37(2):108–22.PubMedCrossRef
87.
Hill EK, Sandbo S, Abramsohn E, Makelarski J, Wroblewski K, Wenrich ER, et al. Assessing gynecologic and breast cancer survivors’ sexual health care needs: Sexual Care Needs of Cancer Survivors. Cancer. 2011;117(12):2643–51.PubMedCrossRef
88.
Kubo A, Altschuler A, Kurtovich E, Hendlish S, Laurent CA, Kolevska T, et al. A pilot mobile-based mindfulness intervention for cancer patients and their informal caregivers. Mindfulness. 2018;9(6):1885–94.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
89.
Lengacher CA, Reich RR, Ramesar S, Alinat CB, Moscoso M, Cousin L, et al. Feasibility of the mobile mindfulness-based stress reduction for breast cancer (mMBSR(BC)) program for symptom improvement among breast cancer survivors. Psychooncology. 2018;27(2):524–31.PubMedCrossRef
90.
Rosen KD, Paniagua SM, Kazanis W, Jones S, Potter JS. Quality of life among women diagnosed with breast cancer: a randomized waitlist controlled trial of commercially available mobile app-delivered mindfulness training. Psychooncology. 2018;27(8):2023–30.PubMedCrossRef
91.
Russell L, Ugalde A, Milne D, Krishnasamy M, Seung Chul EO, Austin DW, et al. Feasibility of an online mindfulness-based program for patients with melanoma: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2018;19:223.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
92.
Zernicke KA, Campbell TS, Speca M, McCabe-Ruff K, Flowers S, Carlson LE. A randomized wait-list controlled trial of feasibility and efficacy of an online mindfulness–based cancer recovery program: the etherapy for cancer applying mindfulness trial. Psychosom Med. 2014;76(4):257–67.PubMedCrossRef
93.
Trevino KM, Raghunathan N, Latte-Naor S, Polubriaginof FCG, Jensen C, Atkinson TM, et al. Rapid deployment of virtual mind-body interventions during the COVID-19 outbreak: feasibility, acceptability, and implications for future care. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29(2):543–6.PubMedCrossRef
94.
Baldwin-Medsker A, Holland J, Rodriguez ES. Access to Care: Using eHealth to limit location-based barriers for patients with cancer. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2020;24:16–23.PubMedCrossRef
95.
Klesges LM, Estabrooks PA, Dzewaltowski DA, Bull SS, Glasgow RE. Beginning with the application in mind: designing and planning health behavior change interventions to enhance dissemination. Ann Behav Med. 2005;29(Suppl):66–75.PubMedCrossRef
96.
Kerner J, Rimer B, Emmons K. Introduction to the special section on dissemination—dissemination research and research dissemination: how can we close the gap? Health Psychol. 2005;24(5):443–6.PubMedCrossRef
97.
Reese JB, Smith KC, Handorf E, Sorice K, Bober SL, Bantug ET, et al. A randomized pilot trial of a couple-based intervention addressing sexual concerns for breast cancer survivors. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2019;37(2):242–63.PubMedCrossRef
98.
Ljungman L, Eriksson LE, Flynn KE, Gorman JR, Stahl O, Weinfurt K, et al. Sexual dysfunction and reproductive concerns in young men diagnosed with testicular cancer: an observational study. J Sex Med. 2019;16(7):1049–59.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Opening the Conversation: study protocol for a Phase III trial to evaluate a couple-based intervention to reduce reproductive and sexual distress among young adult breast and gynecologic cancer survivor couples
Authors
Jessica R. Gorman
Karen S. Lyons
S. Marie Harvey
Chiara Acquati
John M. Salsman
Deborah A. Kashy
Julia H. Drizin
Ellie Smith
Lisa M. Flexner
Brandon Hayes-Lattin
Jennifer B. Reese
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06665-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Trials 1/2022 Go to the issue

Research

Generalizability and reach of a randomized controlled trial to improve oral health among home care recipients: comparing participants and nonparticipants at baseline and during follow-up

Study protocol

Kangyi Qiangshen Gong exercise prescription for pulmonary function and quality of life in patients recovered from COVID-19: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Focused Ultrasound and RadioTHERapy for non-invasive palliative pain treatment in patients with bone metastasis: a study protocol for the three armed randomized controlled FURTHER trial

Study protocol

Effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment associated with pain education and clinical hypnosis in individuals with chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial

Research

The efficacy and tolerability of sports drink versus water in bowel preparations: a randomised controlled study

Study protocol

A savings intervention to reduce men’s engagement in HIV risk behaviors: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial