Abstract
Purpose
This qualitative study examined how young adult breast cancer survivors (YABCS) and their partners appraised and managed their sexual health and intimate relationships after cancer.
Methods
We conducted concurrent, individual telephone interviews with 25 YABCS and their male partners. We utilized a thematic, inductive analysis to examine individual interviews, followed by analysis within and across couples to identify dyadic themes. We explored how themes mapped on to the Theory of Dyadic Illness Management to build a conceptual model specific to the sexual health challenges of young adult couples living with cancer.
Results
Our analysis revealed five interconnected themes: (1) shared understanding of physical and psychological challenges of sexual health after cancer, (2) navigating role shifts and changes to sexual relationship, (3) getting through it as a team, (4) maintaining open communication, and (5) need for services and support for partners/caregivers and couples.
Conclusion
Both survivors and their partners articulated physical (e.g., painful sex, decreased libido) and psychological (e.g., guilt, self-consciousness) challenges to their sexual health in survivorship. Our dyadic focus revealed a spectrum of ways that couples managed the changes to their relationships and sexual health, highlighting “open communication” and strategies for “working as a team” as critical. There is no “one size fits all” solution, as individuals and couples cope with and manage these challenges in different ways. Study results can inform couple-focused intervention strategies, such as creating shared understanding of sexual health after cancer and improving communication skills.
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00520-020-05396-y/MediaObjects/520_2020_5396_Fig1_HTML.png)
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures, 2018
**g L, Zhang C, Li W, ** F, Wang A (2019) Incidence and severity of sexual dysfunction among women with breast cancer: a meta-analysis based on female sexual function index. Support Care Cancer 27:1171–1180
Gilbert E, Ussher JM, Perz J (2010) Sexuality after breast cancer: a review. Maturitas 66:397–407
Paterson CL, Lengacher CA, Donovan KA, Kip KE, Tofthagen CS (2016) Body image in younger breast Cancer survivors: a systematic review. Cancer Nurs 39:E39–E58
Stanton AM, Handy AB, Meston CM (2018) Sexual function in adolescents and young adults diagnosed with cancer: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv 12:47–63
Robertson EG, Sansom-Daly UM, Wakefield CE, Ellis SJ, McGill BC, Doolan EL, Cohn RJ (2016) Sexual and romantic relationships: experiences of adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol 5:286–291
Ljungman L, Ahlgren J, Petersson LM, Flynn KE, Weinfurt K, Gorman JR, Wettergren L, Lampic C (2018) Sexual dysfunction and reproductive concerns in young women with breast cancer: type, prevalence, and predictors of problems. Psycho-oncology 27:2770–2777
Stabile C, Goldfarb S, Baser RE, Goldfrank DJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Barakat RR, Dickler MN, Carter J (2017) Sexual health needs and educational intervention preferences for women with cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 165:77–84
Dobinson KA, Hoyt MA, Seidler ZE, Beaumont AL, Hullmann SE, Lawsin CR (2016) A grounded theory investigation into the psychosexual unmet needs of adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol 5:135–145
Beckjord E, Campas BE (2007) Sexual quality of life in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer. J Psychosoc Oncol 25:19–36
Blouet A, Zinger M, Capitain O, Landry S, Bourgeois H, Seegers VT, Pointreau Y (2019) Sexual quality of life evaluation after treatment among women with breast cancer under 35 years old. Support Care Cancer 27:879–885
Gilbert E, Ussher JM, Perz J (2011) Sexuality after gynaecological cancer: a review of the material, intrapsychic, and discursive aspects of treatment on women’s sexual-wellbeing. Maturitas 70:42–57
Berg CA, Upchurch R (2007) A developmental-contextual model of couples co** with chronic illness across the adult life span. Psychol Bull 133:920–954
Lee CS, Vellone E, Lyons KS, Cocchieri A, Bidwell JT, D’Agostino F, Hiatt SO, Alvaro R, Buck HG, Riegel B (2015) Patterns and predictors of patient and caregiver engagement in heart failure care: a multi-level dyadic study. Int J Nurs Stud 52:588–597
Lyons KS, Lee CS, Bennett JA, Nail LM, Fromme EK, Hiatt SO, Sayer AG (2014) Symptom incongruence trajectories in lung cancer dyads. J Pain Symptom Manag 48:1031–1040
Loaring JM, Larkin M, Shaw R, Flowers P (2015) Renegotiating sexual intimacy in the context of altered embodiment: the experiences of women with breast cancer and their male partners following mastectomy and reconstruction. Health Psychol 34:426–436
Manne SL (1999) Intrusive thoughts and psycholgocial distress among cancer patietns: the role of spouse avoidance and criticism. J Consult Clin Psychol 67:539–546
Manne SL, Dougherty J, Veach S, Kless R (1999) Hiding worries from one’s spouse: protective buffering among cancer patients and their spouses. Cancer Res Ther Control 8:175–188
Borstelmann N, Rosenberg SM, Gelber SI, Meyer ME, Ruddy KJ, Schapira L, Come SE, Borges VF, Cadet T, Maramaldi P, Partridge AH (2017) Partners of young breast cancer survivors: a cross-sectional evaluation of psychosocial issues and mental health. J Clin Oncol 35:184–184
Keesing S, Rosenwax L, McNamara B (2016) A dyadic approach to understanding the impact of breast cancer on relationships between partners during early survivorship. BMC Womens Health 16:57
Kiecolt-Glaser JK, Wilson SJ (2017) Lovesick: how couples’ relationships influence health. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 13:421–443
Hagedoorn M, Sanderman R, Coyne JC, Bolks HN, Tuinstra J (2008) Distress in couples co** with cancer: a meta-analysis and critical review of role and gender effects. Psychol Bull 134:1–30
Lyons KS, Lee CS (2018) The theory of dyadic illness management. J Fam Nurs 24:8–28
Rubin HJ, Rubin I (2012) Qualitative interviewing: the art of hearing data. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks
Thompson L, Walker AJ (1982) The dyad as the unit of analysis - conceptual and methodological issues. J Marriage Fam 44:889–900
Patton MQ (1990) Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA
Perz J, Ussher JM, Gilbert E, Australian C, Sexuality Study T (2014) Feeling well and talking about sex: psycho-social predictors of sexual functioning after cancer. BMC Cancer 14:228
Bober SL, Varela VS (2012) Sexuality in adult cancer survivors: challenges and intervention. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 30:3712–3719
Geue K, Schmidt R, Sender A, Sauter S, Friedrich M (2015) Sexuality and romantic relationships in young adult cancer survivors: satisfaction and supportive care needs. Psycho-oncology 24:1368–1376
Murphy D, Klosky JL, Termuhlen A, Sawczyn KK, Quinn GP (2013) The need for reproductive and sexual health discussions with adolescent and young adult cancer patients. Contraception 88:215–220
Kayser K, Watson LE, Adnrade JT (2007) Cancer as a “we-disease”: examining the process of co** from a relational perspective. Fam Syst Health 25:404–418
Manne S, Ostroff J, Winkel G, Goldstein L, Fox K, Grana G (2004) Posttraumatic growth after breast cancer: patient, partner, and couple perspectives. Psychosom Med 66:442–454
Manne SL, Ostroff JS, Norton TR, Fox K, Goldstein L, Grana G (2006) Cancer-related relationship communication in couples co** with early stage breast cancer. Psycho-oncology 15:234–247
Badr H, Acitelli LK, Taylor CL (2008) Does talking about their relationship affect couples' marital and psychological adjustment to lung cancer? J Cancer Surviv: Res Pract 2:53–64
Lee CS, Lyons KS (2019) Patterns, relevance and predictors of dyadic mental health over time in lung cancer. Psycho-oncology 28:1721–1727
Badr H, Taylor CL (2006) Social constraints and spousal communication in lung cancer. Psycho-oncology 15:673–683
Kuijer RG, Ybema JF, Buunk BP, De Jong GM, Thijs-Boer F, Sanderman R (2000) Active engagement, protective buffering, and overprotection: three ways of giving support by intimate partners of patients with cancer. J Soc Clin Psychol 19:256–275
Hawkins Y, Ussher J, Gilbert E, Perz J, Sandoval M, Sundquist K (2009) Changes in sexuality and intimacy after the diagnosis and treatment of cancer: the experience of partners in a sexual relationship with a person with cancer. Cancer Nurs 32:271–280
Robinson L, Miedema B, Easley J (2014) Young adult cancer survivors and the challenges of intimacy. J Psychosoc Oncol 32:447–462
Ussher JM, Perz J, Gilbert E (2014) Women’s sexuality after cancer: a qualitative analysis of sexual changes and renegotiation. Women Ther 37:205–221
Baucom DH, Porter LS, Kirby JS, Gremore TM, Keefe FJ (2005) Psychosocial issues confronting young women with breast cancer. Breast Dis 23:103–113
DuBenske LL, Gustafson DH, Namkoong K, Hawkins RP, Atwood AK, Brown RL, Chih MY, McTavish F, Carmack CL, Buss MK, Govindan R, Cleary JF (2014) CHESS improves Cancer Caregivers' burden and mood: results of an eHealth RCT. Health Psychol 33:1261–1272
Wiklander M, Strandquist J, Obol CM, Eriksson LE, Winterling J, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Fugl-Meyer KS, Ahlgren J, Ljungman P, Lampic C, Wettergren L (2017) Feasibility of a self-help web-based intervention targeting young cancer patients with sexual problems and fertility distress. Support Care Cancer 25:3675–3682
Christie KM, Meyerowitz BE, Stanton AL, Rowland JH, Ganz PA (2013) Characteristics of breast cancer survivors that predict partners' participation in research. Ann Behav Med 46:107–113
Emilee G, Ussher JM, Perz J (2010) Sexuality after breast cancer: a review. Maturitas 66:397–407
Acknowledgments
Recruitment was facilitated by Dr. Susan Love Research Foundation’s Army of Women. We would like to thank the cancer survivors and their partners who participated in this study.
Funding
This work was funded by Oregon State University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Protection of human subjects
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (Oregon State University Human Research Protection Program, protocol 7621) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gorman, J.R., Smith, E., Drizin, J.H. et al. Navigating sexual health in cancer survivorship: a dyadic perspective. Support Care Cancer 28, 5429–5439 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05396-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05396-y