Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on August 3, 2006
Human Reproduction 2006 21(12):3206-3216; doi:10.1093/humrep/del307
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Facilitators and obstacles to sperm banking in young men receiving gonadotoxic chemotherapy for cancer: the perspective of survivors and health care professionals
1 Department of Psychology, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec 2 SMBD-Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec 3 Psychosocial Oncology Program, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec 4 Behavioral Sciences and Health, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario 5 Department of Psychosocial Resources, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta 6 Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta and 7 Department of Urology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec
8 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Psychology, Université de Montréal, 90 Vincent D’Indy, Montreal, Quebec, H2V 2S9. E-mail: marie.achille{at}umontreal.ca
BACKGROUND: Testicular cancer and Hodgkin’s disease are among the most common malignancies to affect young men of reproductive age. Although both are associated with high rates of infertility, sperm banking (SB) remains underutilized by both diagnostic groups. Reasons for this remain elusive. METHODS: This study used a qualitative design. In-depth interviews were conducted with 20 cancer survivors and 18 health care professionals (HCPs) to examine their perspectives on factors that facilitate or hinder SB. Interview data were analysed using a mixed approach and a three-step process of data reduction, data display and conclusion drawing and verification. RESULTS: Eight factors were identified as having an impact on SB, and findings suggest that effective promotion of SB involves adequate communication around the severity and personal risk for infertility, assessing the importance of patients place on having children, emphasizing the benefits of SB and addressing possible obstacles such as cost, misperceptions or cultural and other factors. In addition, the communicator should be perceived as appealing. CONCLUSIONS: These results are conceptually consistent with both the Health Belief Model and the Elaboration Likelihood Model of health promotion and are useful in informing HCPs on how to better promote SB.
Key words: male infertility/psychology/sperm cryopreservation/testis cancer
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. Tschudin and J. Bitzer Psychological aspects of fertility preservation in men and women affected by cancer and other life-threatening diseases Hum. Reprod. Update, September 1, 2009; 15(5): 587 - 597. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. K. Ogle, W. L. Hobbie, C. A. Carlson, A. T. Meadows, M. M. Reilly, and J. P. Ginsberg Sperm Banking for Adolescents With Cancer Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, April 1, 2008; 25(2): 97 - 101. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Nagel and M. Neal Discussions Regarding Sperm Banking With Adolescent and Young Adult Males Who Have Cancer Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, April 1, 2008; 25(2): 102 - 106. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. T. Vadaparampil, H. Clayton, G. P. Quinn, L. M. King, M. Nieder, and C. Wilson Pediatric Oncology Nurses' Attitudes Related to Discussing Fertility Preservation With Pediatric Cancer Patients and Their Families Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, October 1, 2007; 24(5): 255 - 263. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|