Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
Department of Hematology/Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
JCO Oncol Pract. 2024 Jun;20(6):852-860. doi: 10.1200/OP.23.00499. Epub 2024 Feb 6.
Clinical oncology guidelines recommend addressing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) concerns in routine cancer care. However, limited training often hinders clinicians' ability to do so effectively. The objective of this study was to understand the state of current fellowship education on SRH (ie, sexual health, safe sex practices, and fertility) through conducting a national survey of US hematology/oncology fellowship program directors (PDs).
A survey was sent to all PDs of adult hematology/oncology fellowship programs in the United States via online link. PDs who did not complete the survey were sent up to four follow-up emails and a paper mailing. Descriptive statistics and McNemar tests were conducted.
One hundred-fourteen PDs responded (65%). Fewer programs offered formal instruction on sexual health (49%) and safe sex practices (37%) compared with fertility (75%). Informal training in SRH relied heavily on direct clinical experience (73%-78% of programs), with other methods (eg, case-based approaches, webinars, and journal clubs) being less common. Lack of experts to provide instruction was the most commonly cited barrier to offering training in SRH, endorsed by 74% for sexual health, 68% for safe sex practices, and 54% for fertility; difficulty finding space within the curriculum (50%; 54%; and 43%, respectively) and a lack of training requirements were also commonly endorsed (57%; 60%; and 35%, respectively). Barriers were endorsed more commonly for sexual health topics than fertility.
The results highlight the scarcity of training in SRH, particularly in sexual health, within hematology/oncology fellowship programs. The heavy reliance on informal instruction methods may lead to inconsistent and inadequate education. Efforts to integrate comprehensive training in SRH into fellowship programs are crucial to ensuring that such concerns are included in routine cancer care.
临床肿瘤学指南建议在常规癌症护理中解决性与生殖健康(SRH)问题。然而,培训的缺乏往往会限制临床医生有效解决这些问题的能力。本研究的目的是通过对美国血液学/肿瘤学研究员项目主任(PD)进行全国性调查,了解当前 SRH(即性健康、安全性行为实践和生育力) Fellowship 教育的状况。
通过在线链接向美国所有成人血液学/肿瘤学研究员项目的 PD 发送了一份调查。未完成调查的 PD 会收到最多四封后续电子邮件和一份纸质邮件。进行了描述性统计和 McNemar 检验。
114 名 PD 做出回应(65%)。与生育力(75%)相比,较少的项目提供关于性健康(49%)和安全性行为实践(37%)的正式指导。SRH 的非正式培训严重依赖于直接临床经验(73%-78%的项目),其他方法(如案例方法、网络研讨会和期刊俱乐部)则较少使用。缺乏提供指导的专家是开展 SRH 培训的最常见障碍,74%的人认为性健康存在该障碍,68%的人认为安全性行为实践存在该障碍,54%的人认为生育力存在该障碍;在课程中找到空间的困难(分别为 50%、54%和 43%)和缺乏培训要求也普遍得到认可(分别为 57%、60%和 35%)。性健康主题的障碍比生育力更受认可。
结果突出了血液学/肿瘤学研究员项目中 SRH 培训的稀缺性,特别是在性健康方面。对非正式教学方法的严重依赖可能导致教育的不一致和不充分。努力将全面的 SRH 培训纳入研究员项目对于确保这些问题纳入常规癌症护理至关重要。