A Cross-Sectional Survey of Healthcare Professionals’ Knowledge, Attitude and Current Behaviours towards Female Fertility Preservation Services within the UK

Author:

Kasaven Lorraine S.1234,Mitra Anita12,Chawla Mehar1ORCID,Murugesu Sughashini12,Anson Nicholas14,Ben Nagi Jara4,Theodorou Efstathios4ORCID,Rimmer Michael P.5,Al-Wattar Bassel67,Yazbek Joseph12,Jones Benjamin P.12,Saso Srdjan12

Affiliation:

1. West London Gynaecological Cancer Centre, Du Cane Road, London W12 0NN, UK

2. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, South Kensington, London SW7 2AZ, UK

3. Department of Cutrale Perioperative and Ageing Group, Imperial College London, London W12 0NN, UK

4. Centre for Reproductive and Genetic Health, Great Portland Street, London W1W 5QS, UK

5. Centre for Reproductive Health, Institute for Regeneration and Repair, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH16 4UU, UK

6. Beginnings Assisted Conception Unit, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, Sutton SM5 1AA, UK

7. Clinical Trials Unit, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford CM1 1SQ, UK

Abstract

(1) Background: This study aims to establish the knowledge, attitudes and current behaviours towards female fertility preservation (FP) services amongst healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the UK. (2) Methods: An online survey was advertised publicly on the social media platform Instagram between 25 February 2021 and 11 March 2021. (3) Results: In total, 415 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria and completed the survey. The majority of HCPs discussed FP techniques either never 39.5% (n = 164), once a year 20.7% (n = 86) or once a month 17.8% (n = 74). The majority rated their knowledge of each type of FP method as ‘very poor’ or ‘poor’ and strongly disagreed 14.2% (n = 59) or disagreed 42.2% (n = 175) with the statement they ‘felt confident to counsel a patient on FP’. The majority either agreed 37.8% (n = 157) or strongly agreed 22.2% (n = 92) that it was their responsibility to discuss FP and 38.1% (n = 158) agreed or strongly agreed 19.5% (n = 81) they considered the desire for future fertility when planning treatment. The majority 87.2% (n = 362) had not experienced formal training on FP. (4) Conclusions: Discrepancies in knowledge remain regarding techniques of FP, referral pathways, awareness of facilities offering services and existing educational resources. Many HCPs recognise the importance of FP and their responsibility to initiate discussions. The knowledge that FP may not delay the treatment of cancer has also improved; however, training in FP is scarce.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Reference66 articles.

1. Worldwide comparison of survival from childhood leukaemia for 1995–2009, by subtype, age, and sex (CONCORD-2): A population-based study of individual data for 89 828 children from 198 registries in 53 countries;Bonaventure;Lancet Haematol.,2017

2. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2001, with a special feature regarding survival;Jemal;Cancer Interdiscip. Int. J. Am. Cancer Soc.,2004

3. Cancer incidence and mortality projections in the UK until 2035;Smittenaar;Br. J. Cancer,2016

4. Medical and psychosocial aspects of fertility after cancer;Duffy;Cancer J.,2009

5. Oncofertility and preservation of reproductive capacity in children and young adults;Wallace;Cancer,2011

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3