Suppr超能文献

生育力保存的讨论与决策:一项针对患癌青少年男性的试点随机对照试验结果

Fertility Preservation Discussions And Decisions: Results From a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Among Adolescent Males With Cancer.

作者信息

Nahata Leena, Roche Charleen I, Griffith Megan M, Karkare Tanvi, Quinn Gwendolyn P, O'Brien Sarah H, Boone Kelly, Audino Anthony, Yeager Nicholas, Whiteside Stacy, English Jennifer, Klosky James L, Rausch Joseph R, Gerhardt Cynthia A

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA.

Division of Endocrinology, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, USA.

出版信息

Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2025 Aug;72(8):e31795. doi: 10.1002/pbc.31795. Epub 2025 May 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The Family-centered Adolescent Sperm banking values clarification Tool (FAST) was developed to facilitate sperm banking communication and decision-making pre-cancer treatment. The FAST was tested in a pilot parallel randomized controlled trial (Fertility Preservation Discussions And Decisions: "FP-DAD"-NCT04268004), aiming to (i) assess feasibility/acceptability of FP-DAD; and (ii) examine efficacy regarding banking attempts (yes/no) and decision quality. Differences in decision quality by banking attempt were explored.

DESIGN/METHODS: Males (12-25 years, new cancer diagnosis) and caregivers were randomized to standard of care (fertility consult) or FP-DAD (fertility consult + FAST + interventionist-led discussion). One month later, FP-DAD participants completed acceptability surveys. Both arms completed the Brief Subjective Decision Quality measure. Descriptive statistics, chi-square, and independent samples t-tests/mixed-models examined relationships between variables.

RESULTS

Acceptability ratings of FP-DAD were high (88%-100%). Recruitment and participation challenges limited the final sample size (21 adolescents and 32 caregivers). Banking attempts (67% in standard of care vs. 82% in FP-DAD) did not differ by arm. While decision quality was not significantly different between groups, effect sizes were medium-large for four of six items for adolescents (d = 0.6 to -0.90) and two of six for caregivers (d = 0.36 to -0.78). Decision quality was significantly higher across several domains among those who banked.

CONCLUSIONS

FP-DAD had high acceptability, though feasibility challenges (e.g., time contraints) limited full family participation. Findings showed limited efficacy, but effect sizes suggest this may be due to sample size. Relationships between banking attempts and decision quality emphasize banking benefits. Findings will inform adaptations to the FAST for clinical implementation.

摘要

背景/目的:开发了以家庭为中心的青少年精子库价值观澄清工具(FAST),以促进癌症治疗前精子库相关的沟通和决策。FAST在一项平行随机对照试验(生育力保存讨论与决策:“FP-DAD”-NCT04268004)中进行了测试,旨在(i)评估FP-DAD的可行性/可接受性;(ii)检查在精子库尝试(是/否)和决策质量方面的效果。探讨了精子库尝试在决策质量上的差异。

设计/方法:男性(12 - 25岁,新诊断为癌症)及其照顾者被随机分为标准治疗组(生育咨询)或FP-DAD组(生育咨询 + FAST + 干预者主导的讨论)。一个月后,FP-DAD组的参与者完成了可接受性调查。两组都完成了简短主观决策质量测量。描述性统计、卡方检验以及独立样本t检验/混合模型用于检验变量之间的关系。

结果

FP-DAD的可接受性评分很高(88% - 100%)。招募和参与方面的挑战限制了最终样本量(21名青少年和32名照顾者)。两组的精子库尝试情况(标准治疗组为67%,FP-DAD组为82%)没有差异。虽然两组之间的决策质量没有显著差异,但青少年六项指标中的四项(d = 0.6至 - 0.90)和照顾者六项指标中的两项(d = 0.36至 - 0.78)的效应量为中等至较大。在进行了精子库尝试的人群中,几个领域的决策质量显著更高。

结论

FP-DAD具有较高的可接受性,尽管可行性挑战(如时间限制)限制了整个家庭的参与。研究结果显示效果有限,但效应量表明这可能是由于样本量的原因。精子库尝试与决策质量之间的关系强调了精子库的益处。研究结果将为FAST在临床实施中的调整提供参考。

相似文献

3
Nutritional interventions for survivors of childhood cancer.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Aug 22;2016(8):CD009678. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009678.pub2.
4
Inhaled mannitol for cystic fibrosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 9;2(2):CD008649. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008649.pub3.
5
Antioxidants for male subfertility.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 4;5(5):CD007411. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007411.pub5.
6
Shared decision-making for people with asthma.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Oct 3;10(10):CD012330. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012330.pub2.
7
Sertindole for schizophrenia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jul 20;2005(3):CD001715. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001715.pub2.
8
Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 11;11(11):CD007297. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007297.pub3.
9
Interventions for interpersonal communication about end of life care between health practitioners and affected people.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 8;7(7):CD013116. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013116.pub2.
10
Interventions for the treatment of brain radionecrosis after radiotherapy or radiosurgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jul 9;7(7):CD011492. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011492.pub2.

本文引用的文献

1
Eggsurance? A randomized controlled trial of a decision aid for elective egg freezing.
Hum Reprod. 2024 Aug 1;39(8):1724-1734. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deae121.
4
Clinicians' perspectives on barriers and facilitators to sperm banking in adolescent males with cancer: a mixed-methods study.
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2023 Dec;40(12):2809-2817. doi: 10.1007/s10815-023-02944-3. Epub 2023 Sep 21.
6
Body image disturbances in adolescent and young adult cancer patients confronting infertility risk and fertility preservation decisions.
J Psychosoc Oncol. 2024;42(2):208-222. doi: 10.1080/07347332.2023.2235607. Epub 2023 Jul 15.
10
The evolution of fertility preservation care models in a large pediatric cancer and blood disorders center.
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2023 Jan;70(1):e30052. doi: 10.1002/pbc.30052. Epub 2022 Oct 29.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验