Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013 Feb;10 Suppl 1(0 1):127-32.
doi: 10.1111/jsm.12049.

Communication and intimacy-enhancing interventions for men diagnosed with prostate cancer and their partners

Affiliations
Review

Communication and intimacy-enhancing interventions for men diagnosed with prostate cancer and their partners

Christian J Nelson et al. J Sex Med. 2013 Feb.

Abstract

Introduction: The sexual dysfunction following prostate cancer treatments often leads to a reduction in intimate contact for couples. A number of psychosocial interventions have been developed to enhance intimacy in these couples. This paper reviews three of these interventions and is a summary of a presentation given as part of a symposium at the 2011 Cancer Survivorship and Sexual Health Meeting.

Aim: The goal of this presentation was to: (i) review three types of psychosocial interventions; and (ii) describe the methodological issues highlighted by these interventions.

Main outcome measures: Validated measures of relationship intimacy and communication.

Methods: To be selected, the interventions had to be: a randomized control trial, focus on a couples approach to therapy, and report at least one relationship outcome.

Results: The results were not consistent within or across studies, and suggest that some specific aspects of the interventions may be helpful for the patient, while other aspects of the studies may be helpful for the partner. The Northouse et al. study suggests that partners may benefit from a focus on couple work, as compared to the patient. The Canada et al. study indicates that when focusing on sexual functioning, working with a couple did not show significant benefit compared to working with a man alone. The study did show, however, that a sexual-based intervention can improve the use of erectile dysfunction treatments and suggests patients may benefit from specific focus on side effects of treatment. The Manne et al. study highlights the importance of targeting these interventions to couples who report distress, and for distressed couples, an intervention can show positive results.

Conclusions: Intimacy enhancing interventions can be effective for couples, while the partners may benefit more from couples work; the patients may benefit more from focus on specific side effects.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts to report.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. ACS. Cancer Facts and Figures. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2012.
    1. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Häggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, Spångberg A, Busch C, Nordling S, Garmo H, Palmgren J, Adami HO, Norlén BJ, Johansson JE, Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study No. 4 Radical prostatectomy vs. watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1977–84. - PubMed
    1. Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Kattan MW. Predicting an optimal outcome after radical prostatectomy: The trifecta nomogram. J Urol. 2008;179:2207–10. discussion 10–1. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jemal A, Murray T, Samuels A, Ghafoor A, Ward E, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2003. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003;53:5–26. - PubMed
    1. Moul JW. Treatment options for prostate cancer: Part I-stage, grade, PSA, and changes in the 1990’s. Am J Manag Care. 1998;4:1031–3.

MeSH terms