RESUMO
Objective: Fertility preservation is a priority in oncology for female cancer patients. However, there is a lack of communication between infertility specialists and oncologists. This study aimed to evaluate infertility specialists' perceptions and experiences regarding fertility preservation. Methods: Conduct an online survey to profile infertility specialists. Participants were infertility affiliated with the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations (FEBRASGO). The specialists received an online survey, which response rate were 30.9%, most of whom were in southern and southeastern. The survey consisted on 14 questions about the infertility specialists' location, techniques in clinical practice, treatment successful rate, patients idea, etc. Results: The average experience in human reproduction were 15.5 ± 10.2 years (mean ± standard deviation, range 1-40). Among reproductive-aged female cancer patients recommended for fertility preservation, 60.3 ± 28.8% (range 10-100%) underwent preservation procedures. Main barriers were cost (41%), oncologists' knowledge or acceptance (35%) and accessibility (9%). Most infertility specialists (58%) considered 40 years the limit for fertility preservation. Leukemia, lymphoma, breast and ovarian cancers were prioritized for fertility preservation, while lung, thyroid, gastric, and brain cancers were less relevant. Conclusion: This is the first Brazilian study about infertility specialists' perceptions on oncology patients access to fertility preservation. These patients primarily receive treatment in the public health system, while infertility specialists mainly work in the private healthcare. This healthcare mode is currently fragmented, but integrating these experts is enhancing patient access to fertility preservation. Studies on this topic are still warranted.
RESUMO
Abstract Breaking bad news is common in obstetrics and gynecology (ob-gyn). However, it is difficult, and few doctors receive training on how to deal with this situation. This narrative review aims to gather, analyze, and synthesize part of the knowledge on the area, focused on Ob-Gyn. Among the 16 selected articles, two are randomized controlled intervention studies, and most studies refer to obstetrics. The results found by us pointed out that simulation, feedback/debriefing, lectures, and protocols could improve doctors' performance in communicating bad news. For patients, the context and how the information is transmitted seem to impact more than the content of the news. Ob-Gyn doctors could benefit from specific protocols and education, given the specialty's particularities. There is a lack of evidence about the most effective way to conduct such training. Finding validated ways to quantify and classify studies' results in the area, which would allow for the objective analysis of outcomes, is one of the biggest challenges concerning this topic.
Resumo Dar más notícias é comum em obstetrícia e ginecologia. Porém, é difícil e poucos médicos recebem treinamento sobre como lidar com essa situação. Esta revisão narrativa tem como objetivo reunir, analisar e sintetizar parte do conhecimento sobre a área, com foco na obstetrícia. Dentre os 16 artigos selecionados, dois são estudos de intervenção randomizados e controlados, e a maioria dos estudos refere-se à obstetrícia. Os resultados encontrados ressaltaram que simulação, feedback/entrevistas, palestras e protocolos podem melhorar o desempenho dos médicos na comunicação de más notícias. Para os pacientes, o contexto e como as informações são transmitidas parecem ter maior impacto do que o conteúdo das notícias. Os obstetras e ginecologistas poderiam se beneficiar de cursos e protocolos específicos, dadas as particularidades da especialidade. Faltam evidências sobre a forma mais eficaz de realizar esse treinamento. Encontrar formas validadas de quantificar e classificar os resultados dos estudos na área, permitindo uma análise objetiva dos resultados, é um dos maiores desafios neste tema.