Cited by 180Sexual function and dysfunction studiesCancer survivorship and careWomen's cancer prevention and management

Sexual functioning in breast cancer survivors experiencing body image disturbance

Boquiren, Virginia M., Esplen, Mary Jane, Wong, Jiahui, Toner, Brenda, Warner, Ellen, Malik, Noorulain·2016·Psycho-Oncology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer treatments and the traumatic nature of the cancer experience frequently elicit considerable sexual difficulties. Breast cancer survivors (BCS) experiencing body image (BI) issues may represent a vulnerable group for developing sexual dysfunction posttreatment. The current study explores sexual functioning (SF) in this unique clinical group. METHODS: A descriptive study assessed 127 BCS who were engaged in sexual activity. Standardized baseline measures included the following: BI Scale, BI after Breast Cancer Questionnaire, Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast. Levels of SF were compared with BCS, heterogeneous cancer, and healthy female populations. Correlational analyses were conducted between SF, BI, relationship, and health-related quality of life variables. Guided by a conceptual framework, regression analyses were conducted to determine significant demographic, clinical, and psychosocial predictors of sexual desire, satisfaction, and overall SF. RESULTS: Eighty-three per cent of BCS met the FSFI clinical cutoff score for a sexual dysfunction. Participants exhibited poorer SF when compared with other female cancer and healthy groups. No significant correlations were found between BI questionnaire total scores and SF. BI after Breast Cancer Questionnaire - Body Stigma subscale showed significant associations with FSFI Arousal, Orgasm, Satisfaction (average r = -0.23), and overall SF (r = -0.25). Vaginal dryness (β = -0.50), body stigma (β = -0.24), and relationship satisfaction (β = 0.27) were significant predictors of overall SF. CONCLUSION: Difficulties in SF appear to be highly prevalent in BCS experiencing BI disturbance posttreatment. Brief screening tools assessing SF should adopt a biopsychosocial model, which includes questions regarding vaginal dryness, relationship satisfaction, and body stigma issues.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pon.3819

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Breast cancer survivors of younger age; presenting negative body image, low perceived sexual attractiveness, poorer marital/relationship satisfaction or relationship distress, facing partner's fear of sexual intercourse, depression, psychological distress, vasomotor symptoms, lymphedema, weight gain, tiredness and pain; having performed a combination of radiotherapy, chemotherapy and hormone ther

    “Breast cancer survivors of younger age; presenting negative or body image disturbance, low perceived sexual attractiveness, poorer marital/relationship satisfaction or relationship distress, facing partner's fear of sexual intercourse, depression, psychological distress, vasomotor symptoms, lymphedema, weight gain, tiredness and pain; having performed a combination of RT, CT and HT, treatment with”
  • Sexual dysfunction prevalence rates in breast cancer survivors range from 45% to 83%, are higher than in the general female population, and persist for several years after treatment completion, compromising survivors' HRQoL.

    “Sexual dysfunction prevalence rates vary in the literature, ranging from 45% to 83% (Boquiren et al., 2016; Panjari et al., 2011; Safarinejad et al., 2013) being higher than in the general female population and persisting for several years after treatment completion (Raggio et al., 2014) compromising survivors' HRQoL (Safarinejad et al., 2013).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boquiren, V. M., Esplen, M. J., Wong, J., Toner, B., Warner, E., & Malik, N.
Affiliations
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
Corresponding author
Boquiren, Virginia M.
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-04-27
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
66-76
ISSN
  • 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1611
OpenAlex
W2128977899
Cited by
180
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 2
FWCI
10.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psycho-Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance (017731)
  • Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
Keywords
breast cancer survivors, sexual function, body image disturbance, sexual dysfunction, body stigma, vaginal dryness, relationship satisfaction, sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, health-related quality of life, biopsychosocial model, sexual dysfunction screening
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Body Image, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Libido, Middle Aged, Personal Satisfaction, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sexual Behavior, Survivors, Sexual Dysfunctions, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review