TY - JOUR
T1 - Communication about Sexual Health in Breast Cancer
T2 - What Can We Learn from Patients’ Self-Report and Clinic Dialogue?
AU - Reese, Jennifer Barsky
AU - Sorice, Kristen A.
AU - Zimmaro, Lauren A.
AU - Lepore, Stephen J.
AU - Beach, Mary Catherine
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/9
Y1 - 2020/9
N2 - Objective: Research assessing clinical communication about sexual health is limited. We compared clinical communication about sexual health across patients’ self-reports and coded dialogue in breast cancer outpatients. Methods: 134 patients had clinic visits audio-recorded and coded for sexual health communication and completed self-report questionnaires immediately after the visit. Associations between the self-report and dialogue were assessed using Phi coefficient. Agreements (present/absent) and discrepancies (omissions, commissions) about discussed topics were classified and discrepancies analyzed for themes. Results: Sexual health was discussed in 61 of 134 patient visits (46%). Associations were significant (p <.01) but differed by topic (φ =.27-.76). 37 women (23%) had ≥ 1 self-report error. Discrepancies were common (19 omissions, 29 commissions). Patients often omitted communication about sexual concerns when such concerns were not problematic, and interpreted non-specific discussions as including specific topics of concern, even when not explicitly stated. Omissions were more common for women with lower education. Conclusions: Patients’ reports of whether sexual health communication occurs does not always align with observed dialogue, and may vary by personal relevance of the topic. Practice Implications: There are limitations in determining the prevalence of clinical communication about sexual health through patient self-report. Explaining sexual health terms might enhance shared understanding.
AB - Objective: Research assessing clinical communication about sexual health is limited. We compared clinical communication about sexual health across patients’ self-reports and coded dialogue in breast cancer outpatients. Methods: 134 patients had clinic visits audio-recorded and coded for sexual health communication and completed self-report questionnaires immediately after the visit. Associations between the self-report and dialogue were assessed using Phi coefficient. Agreements (present/absent) and discrepancies (omissions, commissions) about discussed topics were classified and discrepancies analyzed for themes. Results: Sexual health was discussed in 61 of 134 patient visits (46%). Associations were significant (p <.01) but differed by topic (φ =.27-.76). 37 women (23%) had ≥ 1 self-report error. Discrepancies were common (19 omissions, 29 commissions). Patients often omitted communication about sexual concerns when such concerns were not problematic, and interpreted non-specific discussions as including specific topics of concern, even when not explicitly stated. Omissions were more common for women with lower education. Conclusions: Patients’ reports of whether sexual health communication occurs does not always align with observed dialogue, and may vary by personal relevance of the topic. Practice Implications: There are limitations in determining the prevalence of clinical communication about sexual health through patient self-report. Explaining sexual health terms might enhance shared understanding.
KW - Breast Cancer
KW - Communication
KW - Dialogue Analysis
KW - Sexual Health
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85083690915&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=purepublist2023&SrcAuth=WosAPI&KeyUT=WOS:000555878100018&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS
U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2020.03.029
DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2020.03.029
M3 - Article
C2 - 32349896
SN - 0738-3991
VL - 103
SP - 1821
EP - 1829
JO - Patient Education and Counseling
JF - Patient Education and Counseling
IS - 9
ER -