Poster Presentation Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting 2022

Evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of a psychosexual intervention for couples post-allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (#361)

Brindha Pillay 1 , Yvonne Panek-Hudson 2 , Teresa Garcia 2 , David Ritchie 2 , Michael Jefford 3 4 , Cassandra Shields 5 6 , Jo Gniel 7 , Jo Phipps-Nelson 4 8 , Allison Drosdowsky 8 , Sarah Blaschke 8 , Steve Ellen 1 , Maria Ftanou 1
  1. Psychosocial Oncology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne
  2. Clinical Haematology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  3. Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  4. Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  5. Australian Centre for Emotionally Focused Therapy, Brisbane
  6. School of Psychology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  7. Landscape of Life, Melbourne
  8. Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne

Purpose: Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) can have a long-term impact on survivors’ sexual functioning and consequently, their relationship satisfaction. This study aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a five-session psychosexual intervention for HSCT survivors and their partners.

Methods: Participants were recruited from Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and Royal Melbourne Hospital Allogeneic Transplantation Service. To be eligible survivors were required to be more than 3 months post-allogeneic HSCT. The intervention comprised two components: 1. A psychosexual education session exploring medical/behavioural treatment options for sexual dysfunction, delivered by a specialist nurse 2. A four-session Emotionally-Focused Therapy-based relationship education programme for couples delivered by a clinical psychologist. Measures assessing relationship quality, sexual functioning, anxiety, and depression were administered pre- and post-intervention. Feasibility was measured via participation rate, adherence to the intervention and compliance with completing main measures. Acceptability of the intervention was assessed via patient and partner satisfaction surveys.

Results: 8 of 85 (9.4%) eligible survivors and their partners participated in the study. Reasons for declining participation included: feeling uncomfortable due to sensitive nature of intervention; no relationship/sexual function issues; and experiencing ongoing medical issues that required attention. 6 of 8 couples (75%) attended at least 4 intervention sessions and 5 of 8 (62.5%) completed the main study measures post-intervention. 5 of 8 couples completed questions regarding perception of change in sexual and relationship satisfaction: 4 reported that sexual satisfaction and relationship satisfaction was somewhat or much better post-intervention; 1 reported no change. All 5 couples agreed or strongly agreed the intervention helped them understand relationship issues that influenced sexual wellbeing.

Conclusion: The intervention was deemed acceptable. However, feasibility criteria were not met, with low enrollment rate. Couples who participated adhered to the intervention and considered it beneficial. Other strategies to identify and manage sexual concerns are required.Â