ABSTRACT
Objective@#To assess the psychological impact of suspension/postponement of various fertility treatments on infertile women during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. @*Methods@#This was a cross-sectional study conducted as an online survey among infertile women consulting either through teleconsultation or physical consultation at a fertility clinic of a tertiary care referral unit. A validated questionnaire was given as a WhatsApp link to the women who were consulting for the resumption of services. Questions asked were based on their socio-demographic parameters, fertility treatment at the time of suspension, anxiety (self-reported) and stress (perceived stress scale-4, PSS-4) due to delay in treatment, psychosocial effect of pandemic, and wishes regarding the resumption of fertility services. @*Results@#Of 430 patients who received the questionnaire, 250 completed the survey (response rate: 58%). The mean age of participants was 29.26±4.18 years and the majority (70.4%) had lower socioeconomic status. The average PSS-4 score was 7.8±0.71, and the prevalence of self-reported anxiety was 72%. Those who suffered migration during the pandemic had significantly higher PSS-4 scores, and increasing age was associated with increased self-reported anxiety due to the suspension of fertility services. The top three priorities reported were infertility and treatment delay (48.4%), job loss (19.2%), and the risk of contracting COVID-19 infection (16%). The degree of spousal support was significantly correlated with lower PSS-4 scores (r=-0.30, P<0.01). On multivariate logistic analysis, duration of infertility, delay in treatment due to suspension of services, and fear of COVID-19 infection were significant predictors of stress and anxiety. @*Conclusion@#This study emphasizes the need to investigate psychosocial health and to provide psychological support to this vulnerable population in addition to triaging fertility treatments in a phased manner.
ABSTRACT
Cervical cancer is still one of the most common female cancers in Asia and the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in low- and middle-income countries. Nowadays, national screening programs for cervical cancer are widely provided in Asian countries. We reviewed the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) in China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, and Thailand. The NCSP were established at varying times, from 1962 in Japan to 2014 in Indonesia. The primary screening method is based on cytology in all countries except for India and Indonesia. In India and Indonesia, visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid (VIA) is mainly used as a primary screening method, and a “see and treat” strategy is applied to women with a positive VIA result. The starting age of NCSP ranges from 18 years in China to 30 years in Thailand. The screening interval is 2 years in all countries except for China and Indonesia, in which it is 3 years. Uptake rates of NCSP vary from 5.0%–59.7%. Many women in low- and middle-income countries still do not participate in NCSP. To improve uptake rates and thereby prevent more cases of cervical cancer, Asian countries should continue to promote NCSP to the public using various approaches.
ABSTRACT
Objective@#The incidence of women in the reproductive age group diagnosed with cancer has recently increased. However, very few patients opt for or are offered fertility preservation (FP) strategies because of a significant lack in awareness. The present study was conducted to evaluate the knowledge of the effect of cancer treatment on fertility and available options for FP. @*Methods@#This was a cross-sectional study conducted at a tertiary care center from March 2019 through August 2019. One hundred female patients with gynecological or nongynecological cancer and 18-40 years of age were interviewed. The participants were categorized on the basis of the modified Kuppuswamy socioeconomic status (SES) scale and the responses of the patients in the different categories were compared. @*Results@#More than half the patients (63%) were in the 20–35-year age group. Most of the patients (71%) were married, and of them, 28 (39.4%) desired to have children. Only 32% of the patients were aware of the detrimental effect of cancer and its treatment on future fertility, and of them, only 28% could specify the gonadotoxic effect of chemotherapy. Knowledge was significantly higher in the upper and middle SES levels than it was in the lower SES level (P<0.001). More than half of the patients (68%) were not aware of the existing FP options, whereas one-third of the patients (32%) were given information about FP by their physicians. @*Conclusion@#The overall awareness of the gonadotoxic effect of cancer therapy and available FP options in the present study was poor. Awareness of FP among both patients and clinicians needs to be increased.
ABSTRACT
Objective@#The incidence of women in the reproductive age group diagnosed with cancer has recently increased. However, very few patients opt for or are offered fertility preservation (FP) strategies because of a significant lack in awareness. The present study was conducted to evaluate the knowledge of the effect of cancer treatment on fertility and available options for FP. @*Methods@#This was a cross-sectional study conducted at a tertiary care center from March 2019 through August 2019. One hundred female patients with gynecological or nongynecological cancer and 18-40 years of age were interviewed. The participants were categorized on the basis of the modified Kuppuswamy socioeconomic status (SES) scale and the responses of the patients in the different categories were compared. @*Results@#More than half the patients (63%) were in the 20–35-year age group. Most of the patients (71%) were married, and of them, 28 (39.4%) desired to have children. Only 32% of the patients were aware of the detrimental effect of cancer and its treatment on future fertility, and of them, only 28% could specify the gonadotoxic effect of chemotherapy. Knowledge was significantly higher in the upper and middle SES levels than it was in the lower SES level (P<0.001). More than half of the patients (68%) were not aware of the existing FP options, whereas one-third of the patients (32%) were given information about FP by their physicians. @*Conclusion@#The overall awareness of the gonadotoxic effect of cancer therapy and available FP options in the present study was poor. Awareness of FP among both patients and clinicians needs to be increased.