Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric faculty: a report from nine academic institutions.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic affected home and work routines, which may exacerbate existing academic professional disparities. Objectives were to describe the impact of the pandemic on pediatric faculty's work productivity, identify groups at risk for widening inequities, and explore mitigation strategies. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of faculty members was conducted at nine U.S. pediatric departments. Responses were analyzed by demographics, academic rank, and change in home caregiving responsibility. RESULTS: Of 5791 pediatric faculty members eligible, 1504 (26%) completed the survey. The majority were female (64%), over 40 years old (60%), and assistant professors (47%). Only 7% faculty identified as underrepresented in medicine. Overall 41% reported an increase in caregiving during the pandemic. When comparing clinical, administrative, research, and teaching activities, faculty reported worse 1-year outlook for research activities. Faculty with increased caregiving responsibilities were more likely to report concerns over delayed promotion and less likely to have a favorable outlook regarding clinical and research efforts. Participants identified preferred strategies to mitigate challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted pediatric faculty productivity with the greatest effects on those with increased caregiving responsibilities. COVID-19 was particularly disruptive to research outlook. Mitigation strategies are needed to minimize the long-term impacts on academic pediatric careers. IMPACT: The COVID-19 pandemic most negatively impacted work productivity of academic pediatric faculty with caregiving responsibilities. COVID-19 was particularly disruptive to short-term (1-year) research outlook among pediatric faculty. Faculty identified mitigation strategies to minimize the long-term impacts of the pandemic on academic pediatric career pathways.

Loneliness and Mortality Risk Among Cancer Survivors in the United States: A Retrospective, Longitudinal Study.

BACKGROUND: Loneliness, a subjective feeling of being isolated, is a prevalent concern for elderly people and more so among cancer survivors because a cancer diagnosis and its subsequent treatment may result in long-term adverse health effects. This study aimed to examine the association of loneliness and mortality risk among cancer survivors in the United States. METHODS: We identified a longitudinal cohort of cancer survivors aged ≥50 years from the nationally representative panel surveys of the 2008-2018 Health and Retirement Study. Follow-up for vital status was through 2020. Loneliness was measured using an 11-item abbreviated version of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3), including questions about lacking companionship and feeling isolated from others. A score was assigned according to the responses to each question, with 1 for least lonely, 2 for moderately lonely, and 3 for the loneliest option. Items were summed to create total loneliness scores for each individual, which were categorized into 4 levels: 11-12 (low/no loneliness), 13-15 (mild loneliness), 16-19 (moderate loneliness), and 20-33 (severe loneliness) based on the sample distribution. Time-varying Cox proportional hazard models with age as a time scale were used to examine the association of loneliness and survival among cancer survivors. RESULTS: A total of 3,447 cancer survivors with 5,808 person-years of observation were included, with 1,402 (24.3%), 1,445 (24.5%), 1,418 (23.6%), and 1,543 (27.6%) reporting low/no, mild, moderate, and severe loneliness, respectively. Compared with survivors reporting low/no loneliness, survivors reporting greater loneliness had a higher mortality risk, with the highest adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) among the loneliest group (aHR, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.25-2.23]; P=.004) following a dose-response association. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated loneliness was associated with a higher mortality risk among cancer survivors. Programs to screen for loneliness among cancer survivors and to provide resources and support are warranted, especially considering the widespread social distancing that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Profiles of women's adjustment after cancer based on sexual and psychosocial wellbeing: results of a cluster analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sexual wellbeing is a critical yet often overlooked aspect of overall wellbeing for women across cancer diagnoses. OBJECTIVE: We identified profiles of women cancer survivors by sexual and psychosocial outcomes and compared groups for differences in relevant outcomes and individual characteristics. METHODS: Partnered women treated for cancer (n = 226; M age = 51.1 (12.6); 54% breast cancer; 86% White) completed a cross-sectional survey assessing sexual and psychosocial wellbeing. K-means cluster analysis modeled subgroups (clusters) with similar response patterns on measures of sexual wellbeing (sexual function, distress, sexual communication, and self-efficacy for communication), psychosocial wellbeing (quality of life (QOL), anxiety and depressive symptoms), and time since treatment. ANOVAs with Tukey post-hoc analyses and chi-square analyses tested cluster mean differences. RESULTS: Three distinct clusters of women differed by levels of adjustment in sexual and psychosocial wellbeing: higher-adjustment (32.7%), intermediate (37.6%), and lower-adjustment (29.6%). Significant differences among the clusters were found for all outcomes, with largest effect sizes for sexual distress (η2p = 0.66), sexual communication (η2p = 0.51), sexual satisfaction (η2p = 0.44), and anxiety and self-efficacy for communication (η2p = 0.32). The intermediate adjustment group was characterized by lower adjustment on measures of sexual and relationship function, and better adjustment on measures of QOL and mood. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that for women cancer survivors, measures of sexual and psychosocial wellbeing can model distinct profiles to inform targeted interventions to meet women's needs. Evidence-based targeted interventions could lead to better sexual function, and ultimately to better QOL and overall wellbeing. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A stepped intervention approach to sexual health care for women with cancer, where content and format depend on degree of sexual and psychosocial adjustment after cancer, may be most appropriate. Interdisciplinary teams may address sexual, emotional, and relationship functioning.

Psychological and sexual distress in rectal cancer patients and partners.

BACKGROUND: Rectal cancer (RC) patients experience unique sources of distress, including sexual dysfunction and body image concerns, which can also cause distress among partners. This preliminary study investigated patterns of psychological distress, sexual functioning, sexual distress, and relationship satisfaction among RC patient-partner couples at pivotal points during cancer treatment. METHODS: Twenty couples participated (N = 40). Patients and partners completed a series of validated measures of psychological distress (ET), sexual functioning (FSFI; IIEF), sexual distress (GMSEX; Sexual Distress Scale) and relationship satisfaction (GMREL) at time of diagnosis, 3 weeks after radiation, 4 weeks post-surgery, and after chemotherapy and surgery for ostomy closure. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and repeated-measures ANOVA were used to analyze scores over time, first for patients and partners, and then by sex. RESULTS: Relationship satisfaction remained elevated over time. In this sample, 55% of patients and 78.9% of partners reported clinically significant rates of psychological distress at diagnosis, which decreased to 23% and 46% respectively at the last assessment. Sexual satisfaction and distress worsened for patients and partners between baseline and surgery for ostomy closure. Both male and female participants reported statistically significant declines in sexual function from baseline to end of treatment (p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: Relative to relationship satisfaction, psychological and sexual health outcomes seem more vulnerable to the effects of RC treatment during the first year after diagnosis, both for patients and partners and for men and women. Results support the need for psychosocial care and sexual education/counseling for couples coping with RC.

Including partners in discussions of sexual side effects from breast cancer: a qualitative study of survivors, partners, and providers.

PURPOSE: Ensuring there are clear standards for addressing cancer-related sexual side effects is important. Currently, there are differences in two leading sets of clinical guidelines regarding the inclusion of survivors' romantic partners into clinical discussions between survivors and their providers about this issue. To help refine guidelines, we examine breast cancer survivor, partner, and oncology provider perspectives about including partners in discussions about cancer-related sexual side effects in a secondary analysis of a broader qualitative study. METHODS: Partnered female breast cancer survivors (N = 29) completed online surveys, and intimate partners of breast cancer survivors (N = 12) and breast oncology providers (N = 8) completed semi-structured interviews. Themes were derived from thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Among survivors who reported a discussion with their provider, fewer than half indicated their partner had been present, despite most survivors expressing it was - or would have been - helpful to include their partner. Partners also largely indicated being included was or would have been helpful, when welcomed by the survivor. Providers similarly emphasized the importance of survivors' autonomy in deciding whether to discuss sexual concerns in the presence of a partner. CONCLUSIONS: Partners were infrequently included in conversations about cancer-related sexual side effects, even though survivors, partners, and providers alike expressed value in these discussions occurring with the couple together - when that is the survivor's preference. Findings suggest future clinical guidelines should emphasize that incorporating partners into clinical discussions about sexual concerns is important for many breast cancer patients. Soliciting and enacting patients' preferences is essential for truly patient-centered care.

Investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer clinicians' communication about sexual health.

PURPOSE: We assessed breast cancer clinicians' perspectives on how the COVID-19 pandemic and increased use of telehealth affected their clinical communication about sexual heath. METHODS: Breast cancer clinicians participating in a sexual health communication intervention study (N = 29; 76% female; 66% oncologists; 34% advanced practice clinicians) completed an online survey. Data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: All clinicians were using telehealth, with most (66%) using it for up to half of their clinic appointments. Although only 14% of clinicians reported having shorter clinic visits, 28% reported having less time to discuss sexual health; 69% reported no change; and 3% said they had more time. Forty-one percent reported sexual health was less of a priority; 55% reported no change; and 3% said it was more of a priority. Thirty-five percent reported telehealth was less conducive to discussing sexual health; 59% reported no change; and 7% reported more conducive. Qualitative analysis revealed key issues underlying the perceived impact of the pandemic on discussions of sexual health including heightened clinician discomfort discussing such issues via telehealth, the less personal nature and privacy issues in telehealth visits, increased concerns about risk of COVID-19 infection and other health concerns (e.g., missing recurrence, mental health) taking priority, and clinician-perceived patient factors (e.g., discomfort, decreased priority) in discussing sexual concerns. CONCLUSION: Pandemic-related changes in breast cancer clinicians' practice could be exacerbating challenges to discussing sexual health. Methods for integrating sexual health into cancer care are needed, regardless of the mode of delivery.

Mobile Technology-Based (mLearning) Intervention to Enhance Breast Cancer Clinicians' Communication About Sexual Health: A Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Most breast cancer clinicians lack training to counsel patients about sexual concerns. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects of a mobile learning (mLearning) intervention (improving Sexual Health and Augmenting Relationships through Education [iSHARE]) aimed at enhancing breast cancer clinicians' knowledge of, beliefs about, and comfort with discussing patients' sexual health concerns. METHODS: Clinicians listened to a 2-part educational podcast series offering information on breast cancer-related sexual health concerns and effective communication on the topic, which consisted of interviews with expert guests. Intervention feasibility was assessed through rates of enrollment, retention, and intervention completion, with benchmarks of 40%, 70%, and 60%, respectively. Acceptability was assessed through program evaluations, with 75% of clinicians rating the intervention favorably (eg, relevance, satisfaction) signifying acceptability. Clinicians self-reported their knowledge about breast cancer-related sexual health concerns, beliefs (ie, self-efficacy for discussing sexual health concerns), and comfort with discussing sexual concerns measured at preintervention and postintervention. Qualitative analysis examined clinicians' perceptions of lessons learned from the intervention. RESULTS: A total of 32 breast cancer clinicians enrolled (46% of those invited; 97% of those who responded and screened eligible), 30 (94%) completed both the intervention and study surveys, and 80% rated the intervention favorably, demonstrating feasibility and acceptability. Results showed positive trends for improvement in clinician knowledge, beliefs, and comfort with discussing sexual health concerns. Clinicians reported key lessons learned, including taking a proactive approach to discussing sexual health concerns, normalizing the topic, addressing vaginal health, sending the message that help is available, and assessing sexual health concerns with patients from different backgrounds. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer clinicians were amenable to participating in the iSHARE intervention and found it useful. iSHARE showed promise for improving clinician's knowledge and comfort discussing patients' sexual health concerns. A larger trial is required to demonstrate efficacy. Future studies should also examine whether iSHARE can improve patient-clinician communication and address patients' sexual concerns.

Efficacy of a multimedia intervention in facilitating breast cancer patients' clinical communication about sexual health: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Many women with breast cancer (BC) hesitate to raise sexual concerns clinically. We evaluated a multimedia intervention to facilitate BC patients' communication about sexual/menopausal health, called Starting the Conversation (STC). METHODS: Female BC patients (N = 144) were randomly assigned to either STC (20-min video, workbook, and resource guide) or control (resource guide only). Audio-recorded dialogue from patients' next oncology clinic encounter was coded for patients' sexual health communication. Self-report surveys assessed patients' beliefs about sexual health communication, self-efficacy for clinical interactions, sexual function/activity, anxiety/depression symptoms, and quality of life at baseline, post-intervention, and 2-month follow-up. T-tests or mixed-effects logistic regression compared study arms. RESULTS: Women in the STC arm were more likely to raise the topic of sexual health (51%; OR = 2.62 [1.02, 6.69], p = 0.04) and ask a sexual health question (40%; OR = 2.85 [1.27, 6.38], p = 0.01) during their clinic encounter than those in the control arm (30% and 19% for raise and ask, respectively). At follow-up, women in the STC arm showed greater improvements in sexual health communication self-efficacy (p = 0.009) and in anxiety symptoms (p = 0.03), and more women were sexually active at follow-up, compared to the control arm (OR = 1.5, 70% vs. 46%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The STC intervention facilitated women's clinical communication about sexual health and reduced women's anxiety, possibly due to increased confidence in expressing their medical needs. Helpful information gained from clinical discussions could have improved women's willingness or ability to engage in sexual activity. Future studies should identify aspects of the clinical encounter most critical to improving women's sexual outcomes.

Understanding benefit finding among patients with colorectal cancer: a longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: Perceiving positive life changes ("benefit finding") is thought to promote better adjustment after cancer, yet is poorly understood among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. We characterized benefit finding and examined its relationship to demographic/medical factors, change over time, and association with distress. METHODS: CRC outpatients (N = 133, 50% metastatic) completed self-report measures (demographic/medical factors, benefit finding, distress) at baseline and 6 months later. Wilcoxon rank-sum (Kruskal-Wallis) tests or Spearman correlations tested associations between benefit finding and demographic/medical factors. Linear regressions assessed (1) change in benefit finding over time and whether this differed by demographic/medical factors, and (2) association between benefit finding and distress and whether this changed over time. RESULTS: Benefit finding was common among patients with CRC, with highest rated items reflecting gratitude, acceptance, and stronger family relationships. Women and racial minorities reported greater benefit finding than men (p < 0.001) and White patients (p = 0.015), respectively. Medical factors (e.g., metastatic disease) were not associated with benefit finding. Benefit finding significantly increased over time (p = 0.03). While greater benefit finding trended towards an association with lower distress, results were not statistically significant and the relationship did not change over time. CONCLUSION: Benefit finding was characterized largely by perceived psychological and social benefits, as opposed to pragmatic benefits. Individual differences and social determinants may be more informative than medical characteristics when it comes to benefit finding; although, cultural factors and mediators should be examined further. Benefit finding seems to evolve over time perhaps as a coping process; however, its association with psychological distress appears tenuous.

Prescribing Patterns of Oral Opioid Analgesic for Acute Pain at a Tertiary Care Children's Hospital Emergency Departments and Urgent Cares.

OBJECTIVES: Despite Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines on adult opioid prescribing, there is a paucity of evidence and no guidelines to inform opioid prescribing in pediatrics. To develop guidelines on pediatric prescribing, it is imperative to evaluate current practice on opioid use. The objectives were to describe prescribing patterns of opioids for acute pain at a children's hospital and to compare clinical characteristics of patients who received less or greater than 3 days. METHODS: A retrospective review of oral opioid analgesics prescribed for acute pain at a tertiary care children's hospital emergency department and urgent care from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2017. Patients younger than 22 years who received an opioid prescription upon discharge were included. Patients with hematology/oncology or chronic pain diagnosis were excluded. RESULTS: Opioids were prescribed for a median of 2.2 days (interquartile range, 1.4-3.0 days). Most opioids were prescribed for ≤3 days (1326; 79.3%), and there were 44 (2.6%) prescriptions for >7 days. Twenty-two opioid formulations were prescribed. Single-ingredient oxycodone was the most commonly prescribed (877; 52.5%); there were 724 (43.3%) acetaminophen combination products. Common diagnoses were orthopedic (973; 58.2%), surgery/burn/trauma (195; 11.7%), and ear/nose/throat (143; 8.6%). Patients who received >3 days of opioids were younger (P < 0.001), and there was no differences in sex, ethnicity, insurance, or provider qualifications. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, prescribing patterns for the duration of opioid analgesics were ≤3 days, with a median of 2 days. There was a large range of days prescribed, with variations in prescribing characteristics among patients and providers.

Prescribing Patterns of Oral Opioid Analgesic for Long Bone Fracture at Tertiary Care Children's Hospital Emergency Departments and Urgent Cares.

OBJECTIVES: Disparities in opioid prescribing in children can lead to underprescribing and poorly controlled pain. On the contrary, unnecessary overprescribing can increase the risk for misuse, abuse, and diversion. The primary objective of this study was to compare the demographics and clinical characteristics of children with an extremity fracture who did and did not receive an opioid prescription from a tertiary care children's hospital. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of children younger than 22 years with extremity fracture evaluated at a tertiary care children's hospital emergency department (ED) and surrounding satellite locations (3 EDs and 4 urgent cares), from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2017. RESULTS: There were 3325 patients younger than 22 years who were seen for evaluation of an extremity fracture. The overall median age of patients was 8 years (interquartile range [IQR], 4-11), and 1976 (59.4%) were male. Patients with extremity fractures who received opioid analgesics were older than those who did not receive opioids (median age of 10 years [IQR, 6-13 years] vs 7 years [IQR, 4-11 years], P < 0.001). There was a significant difference found between insurance types, specifically those patients receiving Medicaid and private insurance. Patients who received opioid analgesics had a higher initial pain score (7 [IQR, 4-9] vs 5 [IQR, 2-7], P < 0.001), were more likely to have an physician (MD/DO) provider (P < 0.001), and were more likely to present to the ED (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Younger patients, patients with Medicaid insurance, patients treated by an advanced care provider, and patients who presented to an urgent care were less likely to receive opioid analgesics upon discharge. These findings demonstrate that more standardization and guidance on opioid prescribing are needed in pediatrics, to both adequately treat pain and reduce harms from overprescribing of opioid analgesics.

Understanding Sexual Help-Seeking for Women With Breast Cancer: What Distinguishes Women Who Seek Help From Those Who Do Not?

BACKGROUND: Sexual problems are extremely common for women after breast cancer (BC). AIM: To determine, in a sample of BC outpatients, how commonly women sought help for sexual concerns, from a health care provider (HCP), from other individuals, or from alternate sources; and to examine whether help-seeking was associated with women's sexual function/activity, self-efficacy for clinical communication about sexual health, or sociodemographic/medical characteristics. METHODS: BC patients participating in a sexual/menopausal health communication intervention trial completed web-based baseline self-report surveys. One-way analysis of variances compared effects of the level of sexual help-seeking (none; 1 outlet; 2-3 outlets) on sexual function domains. Chi-square or t-tests compared women seeking help with those not seeking help on other study variables. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient-reported outcome instruments assessed sexual help-seeking (past month), sexual function and activity (PROMIS Sexual Function and Satisfaction Brief Profile Version 2.0), and self-efficacy (confidence) for communicating with their BC clinician about sexual health. RESULTS: 144 women (mean age = 56.0 years; 62% partnered; 67% white; 27% black/African American; 4% Hispanic/Latina; 15% stage IV) participated in this study. 49% of women sought help for sexual concerns, most often from intimate partners, family and/or friends (42%), followed by HCPs (24%), or online/print materials (19%); very few women (n = 4; 3%) sought help only from a HCP. Women seeking help were younger and more likely to be partnered and sexually active than those not seeking help. Sexual function was impaired for all domains but was most impaired for sexual interest. Among sexually active women, those seeking help from 2 to 3 sources reported worse sexual function in certain domains (sexual interest, lubrication, vaginal discomfort, vulvar discomfort-labial, satisfaction). Women seeking help from outlets other than HCPs had significantly lower self-efficacy than those who did not. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: BC patients with access to a partner and who are sexually active but find sex unsatisfying, uncomfortable, or lack interest may be in particular need of sexual help. Further, women may turn to outlets other than HCPs for sexual help partly because they lack the confidence to do so with a HCP. Sexual health information should be made available to women's partners, family, and friends, so they may effectively discuss such issues if needed. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: Strengths of the study included examination of a range of sexual function domains and a theoretical construct in relation to BC patients' sexual help-seeking and a medically diverse sample. Limitations include a cross-sectional design. CONCLUSION: Women treated for BC should receive accurate and timely sexual health information. Reese JB, Sorice KA, Pollard W, et al. Understanding Sexual Help-Seeking for Women With Breast Cancer: What Distinguishes Women Who Seek Help From Those Who Do Not? J Sex Med 2020;17:1729-1739.

Patients' perceived barriers to discussing sexual health with breast cancer healthcare providers.

OBJECTIVES: We characterized barriers reported by women with breast cancer (BC) regarding clinical discussions of sexual health, clustered women by their endorsement of these barriers, and compared these groups. METHODS: BC outpatients (N = 144; M age = 56, 67% White) in a sexual health communication intervention study provided baseline data. Exploratory factor analysis characterized sexual health communication barriers on a standardized measure. Hierarchical cluster analysis detected patient groups with similar response patterns on these factors. ANOVAs, Chi-Square and Fisher's Exact tests compared groups on socio-demographic/medical factors, sexual health communication self-efficacy and outcome expectancies, general clinical self-efficacy, sexual concerns, emotional distress, and discussion about sexual health with an oncology provider. RESULTS: Two factors emerged: patients' own beliefs about or perceived inability to discuss sexual health (self-centered barriers), and patients' perceptions of providers' reactions to discussing sexual health (provider-centered barriers); self-centered barriers were endorsed more than provider-centered (P < .001). Three clusters emerged: women who endorsed (a) high self-centered and high provider-centered (n = 19; 13%), (b) high self-centered and low provider-centered (n = 95; 66%), and (c) low self-centered and low provider-centered (n = 30; 21%). Women endorsing more barriers reported lower sexual communication self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, and general clinical self-efficacy (P's ≤ .001); no differences in sexual concerns, emotional distress, or discussing sexual health were found. CONCLUSIONS: Women more strongly endorsed self-centered barriers than provider-centered. When grouped according to these barriers, women differed in their confidence and expectations for sexual health communication, regardless of degree of sexual or emotional distress. Interventions are needed to improve both patients' and providers' skills for discussing sexual health.

Steroid variability in pediatric inpatient asthmatics: survey on provider preferences of dexamethasone versus prednisone.

Objective: Our hospital's pediatric Emergency Department (ED) began using dexamethasone for treating asthma exacerbations after ED studies showed non-inferiority of dexamethasone compared to prednisone. However, providers have not reached consensus on optimal inpatient steroid regimen. This study evaluates provider preference for inpatient steroid treatment.Methods: A survey was distributed to providers who care for inpatient pediatric asthmatics. Respondents answered questions about steroid choice and timing. Data were summarized as percentages; bivariate comparisons were analyzed with Pearson's chi-squared test.Results: Ninety-two providers completed the survey (60% response rate). When patients received dexamethasone in the ED, subsequent inpatient management was variable: 44% continued dexamethasone, 14% switched to prednisone, 2% said no additional steroids, and 40% said it depended on the scenario. Hospitalists were more likely to continue dexamethasone than pulmonologists (61% and 15%, respectively; p < .001). Factors that influenced providers to switch to prednisone in the inpatient setting included severity of exacerbation (73%) and asthma history (47%). Fifty-one percent felt uncomfortable using dexamethasone because of "minimal data to support [its] use inpatient." In case-based questions, 28% selected dexamethasone dosing intervals outside the recommended range. Thirteen percent reported experiencing errors in clinical practice.Conclusions: Use of dexamethasone in the ED for asthma exacerbations has led to uncertainty in inpatient steroid prescribing practices. Providers often revert to prednisone, especially in severe asthma exacerbations, possibly due to experience with prednisone and limited research on dexamethasone in the inpatient setting. Further research comparing the effectiveness of dexamethasone to prednisone in inpatient asthmatic children with various severities of illness is needed.

The Effect of CS Administration or an R-Optimized Alternative on Potential Projective Material in Rorschach Responses From Six Studies and a Meta-Analysis of Their Findings.

The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011) introduced R-optimized administration to reduce variability in the number of Responses (R). We provide new data from six studies of participants randomly assigned to receive a version of this method or Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2003) administration. We examine how administration methods affect 3 types of codes most likely to contain potential projective material and the frequency of these codes for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or last response to a card (R in Card). In a meta-analytic summary, we found 37% of responses have 1 type of code, 19% have 2 types, and 3% have all 3 types, with stable proportions across responses within cards. Importantly, administration method had no impact on potential projective variable means. Differential skew across samples made variability harder to interpret. Initial results suggesting differences in 3 of the 18 specific Type by R in Card pairs did not follow a coherent pattern and disappeared when using raw counts from all participants. Overall, data do not support concerns that R-optimized administration might alter potential projective processes, or make potentially "signature" last responses to the card any different in R-PAS than the CS.

A brief intervention to enhance breast cancer clinicians' communication about sexual health: Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Sexual concerns are often unaddressed for breast cancer patients; one reason is inadequate clinician training. We examined the feasibility, acceptability, and potential benefits of a novel intervention, improving Sexual Health and Augmenting Relationships through Education (iSHARE) for breast cancer clinicians. METHODS: Clinicians received training in communicating about sexual concerns with breast cancer patients. Intervention feasibility and acceptability were measured through enrollment/participation and postintervention program evaluations, respectively. Intervention effects were assessed through (1) clinician self-reported beliefs about sexual health communication, assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and 1- or 6-month follow-up, (2) clinical communication coded from audio recorded, transcribed clinic encounters at preintervention or postintervention, and (3) patient satisfaction with clinical care, reported immediately after the clinic visit. Patients also reported sociodemographic characteristics and level of sexual concerns. RESULTS: Seven breast cancer clinicians enrolled (88% participation), completed the intervention, and were audio recorded in clinic encounters with 134 breast cancer outpatients (67 each at preintervention or postintervention). Program evaluations supported intervention acceptability. Effect sizes suggest iSHARE increased clinicians' self-efficacy (d = 0.27) and outcome expectancies for communicating about sexual concerns (d = 0.69) and reduced communication barriers (d = -0.14). Clinicians' sexual health communication behaviors increased from baseline to postintervention, including for raising the topic (28% vs 48%), asking questions (33% vs 45%), and offering information (18% vs 24%). Neither patient satisfaction nor duration of sexual health communication changed (mean duration less than 1 minute at both time points). CONCLUSIONS: The iSHARE intervention was feasible and well received by clinicians and may change breast cancer clinicians' beliefs and communication behaviors regarding sexual health.

A randomized pilot trial of a couple-based intervention addressing sexual concerns for breast cancer survivors.

The purpose was to test the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a 4-session couple-based Intimacy Enhancement (IE) intervention addressing breast cancer survivors' sexual concerns delivered via telephone. Twenty-nine post-treatment breast cancer survivors reporting sexual concerns and their intimate partners were randomized (2:1) to the IE intervention or to an educational control condition, both of which were delivered by trained psychosocial providers. Feasibility and acceptability were measured through recruitment, retention, session completion, and post-intervention program evaluations. Couples completed validated sexual, relationship, and psychosocial outcome measures at pre- and post-intervention. Between-group effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Hedges g. Data supported intervention feasibility and acceptability. For survivors, the IE intervention had medium to large positive effects on all sexual outcomes and most psychosocial outcomes. Effects were less visible for relationship outcomes and were similar but somewhat smaller for partners. The IE intervention demonstrated feasibility, acceptability, and promise in addressing breast cancer survivors' sexual concerns and enhancing their and their partners' intimate relationships and psychosocial well-being. Implications for Psychosocial Oncology Practice The IE intervention demonstrated feasibility and acceptability, suggesting it could be well-received by breast cancer survivors with sexual concerns and their partners. Effects of the IE intervention on breast cancer survivors' sexual concerns and on their and their partners' intimate relationships and psychosocial well-being could not be attributed to therapist time and attention. Interventions that psychosocial providers can use to address breast cancer survivors' sexual concerns are important to the growing number of breast cancer survivors living for many years after their diagnosis.

The Effect of CS Administration or an R-Optimized Alternative on R-PAS Variables: A Meta-Analysis of Findings From Six Studies.

Controlling the number of Rorschach responses (R) as a method to reduce variability in the length of records has stimulated controversy among researchers for many years. Recently, the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011 ) introduced an R-Optimized method to reduce variability in R. Using 4 published and 2 previously unpublished studies (N = 713), we examine the extent to which 51 Comprehensive System-based scores on the R-PAS profile pages are affected as a result of receiving Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2003 ) administration versus a version of R-Optimized administration. As hypothesized, R-the intended target of R-Optimized administration-showed reliable weighted average differences across each method of administration. As expected, its mean modestly increased and its standard deviation notably decreased. Also as hypothesized, the next largest effects were decreases in the variability (SD) of 2 variables directly related to R, R8910% and Complexity. No other reliable differences were observed. Therefore, because R-Optimized administration does not notably modify the existing CS-based normative values for other profiled R-PAS variables, the data do not support concerns that R-Optimized administration notably modifies the Rorschach task or that existing CS research data would not generalize to R-PAS. However, because R-Optimized administration reduces variability in R, it allows a single set of norms to apply readily to more people.

A systematic review of dyadic studies examining relationship quality in couples facing colorectal cancer together.

BACKGROUND: Despite the adverse effects that treatment for colorectal cancer can have on patients' quality of life and, in particular, their intimate relationships, very little research has been conducted on the psychosocial adjustment for both patients and their partners/spouses. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to examine dyadic studies of adjustment in couples in which one partner has been diagnosed with colorectal cancer. METHODS: Pub Med, PsychINFO, MEDLINE, Social Sciences Abstracts (EBSCO), and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies reporting quality of life outcomes for colorectal cancer patients and their partners/spouses. Only studies that included dyads in the sample were eligible for inclusion. The Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies was used to evaluate each study. RESULTS: A total of 277 studies were identified, of which 9 studies met the inclusion criteria (N = 388 couples). The methodological quality of the studies was high in that they used standardized instruments validated with their samples, conducted dyadic data analyses (when appropriate), and used longitudinal designs. A synthesis of the studies revealed that (1) relationship factors (eg, support, communication, dyadic coping, and relationship satisfaction) affect adjustment to cancer; (2) cancer-related distress impacts each partner's adjustment or the relationship; and (3) gender, role (patient/caregiver), and clinical characteristics (treatment, mental health) can mediate adjustment to cancer. CONCLUSION: The quality of the relationship can influence patients' and their partners' adjustment to colorectal cancer. Psychosocial interventions that address relationship issues may be beneficial to couples facing the challenges of colorectal cancer.

Sexual quality of life, body image distress, and psychosocial outcomes in colorectal cancer: a longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: The objectives were to assess changes in sexual QOL and body image distress over time and to examine longitudinal associations between sexual QOL and body image variables with psychosocial outcomes in a sample of colorectal cancer patients. METHODS: Participants (N = 141) completed a mail-based survey assessing sexual QOL [sexual distress (ISS), treatment impact on sexual function (SFQ), sexual function (FSFI; IIEF)], body image distress (BIS), and psychosocial outcomes [relationship quality (DAS-4), depressive symptoms (CESD-SF), and health-related QOL (HRQOL; FACT-C)]; 88 patients completed 6-month follow-up surveys (62%). Gender and cancer subgroups (male vs. female; rectal vs. colon cancer) were compared and longitudinal models examined associations between sexual QOL and body image variables with psychosocial outcomes over time and by subgroup. RESULTS: Impairments in sexual QOL and body image distress were common. Women and patients with rectal cancer reported worse body image distress compared to men (p = .005) and those with colon cancer (p = .03), respectively; compared to patients with colon cancer, those with rectal cancer reported worse treatment impact (p < .001) and marginally worse sexual function and HRQOL (p's = .05). At 6-month follow-up, body image distress decreased (p = .02), while sexual QOL was stable (e.g., 58% classified as dysfunctional at both time points, p = .13). For most sexual and body image predictors, worse impairment was associated with worse psychosocial outcomes over time. Several significant gender and cancer subgroup effects were found. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual QOL and body image are compromised after colorectal cancer and tend to remain impaired if unaddressed. Sexual concerns should be addressed early to limit broader-reaching psychosocial effects.