Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evidence Supporting Couple-Based Interventions for the Recovery of Sexual Intimacy After Prostate Cancer Treatment

Current Sexual Health Reports volume 9, pages 32–41 (2017)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose of the Review

During the past 10 years, interventions supporting couples’ sexual recovery after prostate cancer treatment have been developed and tested. We sought to review these intervention studies to determine the degree to which they have been effective.

Recent Findings

Eleven studies (4 pilot studies and 7 randomized controlled trials) were reviewed. Our findings suggest that outcomes, such as sexual function, relationship satisfaction, or intimacy, are minimally improved. However, the interventions succeed in increasing couples’ knowledge of the treatment-related sexual side effects and rehabilitation, men’s use of ED treatments, partners’ attitudes to ED, and couples’ maintenance of sexual engagement.

Summary

Based on the findings, we propose that further research on couple-based interventions continue to identify meaningful outcomes sensitive to change with the goal of protecting couples from losing sexual relationships despite treatment-related functional losses. An analytic approach that measures patient-partner mutual influence on outcomes is also recommended.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance, •• Of major importance

  1. Darwish-Yassine M et al. Evaluating long-term patient-centered outcomes following prostate cancer treatment: findings from the Michigan Prostate Cancer Survivor study. J Cancer Surviv. 2014;8(1):121–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bernat, J.K., et al. Symptom burden and information needs in prostate cancer survivors: a case for tailored long-term survivorship care. BJU-I. 2015;118(3):372–8.

  3. Hollenbeck BK et al. Sexual health recovery after prostatectomy, external radiation, or brachytherapy for early stage prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep. 2004;5(3):212–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schover LR et al. Defining sexual outcomes after treatment for localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;95(8):1773–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Incrocci L. Radiation therapy for prostate cancer and erectile (dys)function: the role of imaging. Acta Oncol. 2005;44(7):673–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Katz A. What happened? Sexual consequences of prostate cancer and its treatment. Can Fam Physician. 2005;51:977–82.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Bokhour BG et al. Sexuality after treatment for early prostate cancer: exploring the meanings of "erectile dysfunction". J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(10):649–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Hedestig O et al. Living after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a qualitative analysis of patient narratives. Acta Oncol. 2005;44(7):679–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tanner T, Galbraith M, Hays L. From a woman's perspective: life as a partner of a prostate cancer survivor. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2011;56(2):154–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bruun P et al. The lonely female partner: a central aspect of prostate cancer. Urol Nurs. 2011;31(5):294–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wittmann, D., et al. Exploring the role of the partner in couples' sexual recovery after surgery for prostate cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2014;22(9):2509–15.

  12. Yiou R et al. Sexual quality of life in women partnered with men using intracavernous alprostadil injections after radical prostatectomy. J Sex Med. 2013;10(5):1355–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zaider T et al. Loss of masculine identity, marital affection, and sexual bother in men with localized prostate cancer. J Sex Med. 2012;9(10):2724–32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Bober SL, Varela VS. Sexuality in adult cancer survivors: challenges and intervention. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(30):3712–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Couper JW et al. The psychosocial impact of prostate cancer on patients and their partners. Med J Aust. 2006;185(8):428–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fagundes CP, Berg CA, Wiebe DJ. Intrusion, avoidance, and daily negative affect among couples coping with prostate cancer: a dyadic investigation. J Fam Psychol. 2012;26(2):246–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tsivian M et al. Altered male physiologic function after surgery for prostate cancer: couple perspective. Int Braz J Urol. 2009;35(6):673–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Galbraith ME, Fink R, Wilkins GG. Couples surviving prostate cancer: challenges in their lives and relationships. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2011;27(4):300–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Latini DM et al. Sexual rehabilitation after localized prostate cancer: current interventions and future directions. Cancer J. 2009;15(1):34–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Nelson CJ, Emanu JC, Avildsen I. Couples-based interventions following prostate cancer treatment: a narrative review. Transl Androl Urol. 2015;4(2):232–42.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. • Walker LM, Wassersug RJ, Robinson JW. Psychosocial perspectives on sexual recovery after prostate cancer treatment. Nat Rev Urol. 2015;12(3):167–76. Excellent review and guidance regarding realistic intervention building for men and couples coping with the sexual side-effects of prostate cancer.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Moher D et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Manne SL et al. Intimacy-enhancing psychological intervention for men diagnosed with prostate cancer and their partners: a pilot study. J Sex Med. 2011;8(4):1197–209.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Couper J et al. Cognitive existential couple therapy (CECT) in men and partners facing localised prostate cancer: a randomised controlled trial. BJU Int. 2015;115(Suppl 5):35–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Northouse, L., et al. A Tailored Web-Based Psychoeducational Intervention for Cancer Patients and Their Family Caregivers. Cancer Nurs. 2014;37(5):321–30.

  26. Davison BJ et al. Development and evaluation of a prostate sexual rehabilitation clinic: a pilot project. BJU Int. 2005;96(9):1360–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rosen RC et al. The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology. 1997;49(6):822–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. O'Leary KD, Fincham F, Turkewitz H. Assessment of positive feelings toward spouse. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983;51(6):949–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hampton AJ et al. A brief couples' workshop for improving sexual experiences after prostate cancer treatment: a feasibility study. Support Care Cancer. 2013;21(12):3403–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Syrjala KL et al. Sexual function measurement and outcomes incancer survivors and matched controls. Journal of Sex Research. 2000;37(3):213–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lockyer JM et al. Commitment to change statements: a way of understanding how participants use information and skills taught in an educational session. J Contin Educ Heal Prof. 2001;21(2):82–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Wittmann D et al. A one-day couple group intervention to enhance sexual recovery for surgically treated men with prostate cancer and their partners: a pilot study. Urol Nurs. 2013;33(3):140–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Coyne JC, Smith DA. Couples coping with a myocardial infarction: a contextual perspective on wives' distress. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1991;61(3):404–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Neese LE et al. Finding help for sexual problems after prostate cancer treatment: a phone survey of men's and women's perspectives. Psychooncology. 2003;12(5):463–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Walker, L.M., et al. Intimacy after prostate cancer: a brief couples' workshop is associated with improvements in relationship satisfaction. Psychooncology, 2016.

  36. Sharpley CF, Cross DG. A psychometric evaluation of the Spanier dyadic adjustment scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 2004;44:739–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Giesler RB et al. Improving the quality of life of patients with prostate carcinoma: a randomized trial testing the efficacy of a nurse-driven intervention. Cancer. 2005;104(4):752–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Giesler RB et al. Assessing quality of life in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: development of a new instrument for use in multiple settings. Qual Life Res. 2000;9(6):645–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Radloff LS. The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977;1:385–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ware Jr J, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Canada AL et al. Pilot intervention to enhance sexual rehabilitation for couples after treatment for localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;104(12):2689–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Rosen R et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2000;26(2):191–208.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Derogatis LR, Melisaratos N. The Brief Symptom Inventory: an introductory report. Psychol Med. 1983;13(3):595–605.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. • Titta M et al. Sexual counseling improved erectile rehabilitation after non-nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy or cystectomy—results of a randomized prospective study. J Sex Med. 2006;3(2):267–73. The study underscores the value of engaging partners in men's sexual recovery after prostate cancer.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. •• Chambers SK et al. A randomised controlled trial of a couples-based sexuality intervention for men with localised prostate cancer and their female partners. Psychooncology. 2015;24(7):748–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bonevski B et al. Evaluation of an instrument to assess the needs of patients with cancer. Supportive Care Review Group. Cancer. 2000;88(1):217–25. This trial lends strong support to the value of counseling and peer support in promoting adherence to the use of ED treatments.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Latini DM et al. Psychological impact of erectile dysfunction: validation of a new health related quality of life measure for patients with erectile dysfunction. J Urol. 2002;168(5):2086–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Clark JA et al. Measuring patients' perceptions of the outcomes of treatment for early prostate cancer. Med Care. 2003;41(8):923–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Schover, L.R., et al., A randomized trial of internet-based versus traditional sexual counseling for couples after localized prostate cancer treatment. Cancer, 2011.

  50. •• Walker LM et al. Androgen deprivation therapy and maintenance of intimacy: a randomized controlled pilot study of an educational intervention for patients and their partners. Contemp Clin Trials. 2013;34(2):227–31. This study demonstrates that with the proper preparation, couples coping with the sexual side-effects of ADT may be interested in and able to preserve their sexual relationship.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Walker LM, Hampton A, Robinson JW. Assessment of relational intimacy: factor analysis of the personal assessment of intimacy in relationships questionnaire. Psychooncology. 2014;23(3):346–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Robertson J et al. Couple-based psychosexual support following prostate cancer surgery: results of a feasibility pilot randomized control trial. J Sex Med. 2016;13(8):1233–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Wei JT et al. Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology. 2000;56(6):899–905.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Carroll BT et al. Screening for depression and anxiety in cancer patients using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1993;15(2):69–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Stratton P et al. Detecting therapeutic improvement early in therapy: validation of the SCORE-15 index of family functioning and change. J Fam Ther. 2014;36:3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Chambers, S.K., et al., A randomised controlled trial of a couples-based sexuality intervention for men with localised prostate cancer and their female partners. Psychooncology, 2014.

  57. Wittmann D et al. A one-day couple group intervention to enhance sexual recovery for surgically treated men with prostate cancer and their partners: a pilot study. Urol Nurs. 2013;33(3):140–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Robertson JM et al. Exploring the feasibility and acceptability of couple-based psychosexual support following prostate cancer surgery: study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2014;15:183.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. •• Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Cook WL. Dyadic data analysis. New York: NY: Guilford; 2006. Excellent text on managing dyadic data, relevant to couple research.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Manne SL et al. Cancer-specific relationship awareness, relationship communication, and intimacy among couples coping with early stage breast cancer. J Soc Pers Relat. 2014;31(3):314–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Resnick MJ et al. Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(5):436–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Wittmann D, Foley S, Balon R. A biopsychosocial approach to sexual recovery after prostate cancer surgery: the role of grief and mourning. J Sex Marital Ther. 2011;37(2):130–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Pillai-Friedman T, Ashline JL. Women, breast cancer survivorship, sexual losses, and disenfranchised grief—a treatment model for clinicians. Sexual and Relationship Therapy. 2014; doi:10.1080/14681994.2014.934340. This article provides useful ideas for intervention building in that it recognizes the importance of grieving sexual losses and developing new sexuality, based on discovering new erotic sensitivities.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Lindau ST et al. A study of sexuality and health among older adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):762–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. McCarthy, B. and E. McCarthy Rekindling desire: a step by step program to help low sex or no sex marriages. 2003.

  66. Wittmann, D., et al., What couples say about their recovery of sexual intimacy after prostatectomy: toward the development of a conceptual model of couples’ sexual recovery after surgery for prostate cancer. J Sex Med, 2014.

  67. Beck AM, Robinson JW, Carlson LE. Sexual values as the key to maintaining satisfying sex after prostate cancer treatment: the physical pleasure-relational intimacy model of sexual motivation. Arch Sex Behav. 2013;42(8):1637–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Seftel AD. Re: A randomised controlled trial of a couples-based sexuality intervention for men with localised prostate cancer and their female partners. J Urol. 2015;194(1):167–8.

    Google Scholar 

  69. McCaughan E et al. The experience and perceptions of men with prostate cancer and their partners of the CONNECT psychosocial intervention: a qualitative exploration. J Adv Nurs. 2015;71(8):1871–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Road, Building 16, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2800, USA

    Daniela Wittmann

  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA

    Bridget F Koontz

Authors
  1. Daniela Wittmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bridget F Koontz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniela Wittmann.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Daniela Wittmann reports grants from Movember Foundation outside the submitted work.

Bridget F. Koontz reports personal fees from Blue Earth Diagnostics, grants from Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and personal fees from GenomeDx Biosciences, outside the submitted work.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All reported studies were published in peer reviewed journals and had the approval of the authors’ institutional review boards.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Medical Comorbidities

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wittmann, D., Koontz, B.F. Evidence Supporting Couple-Based Interventions for the Recovery of Sexual Intimacy After Prostate Cancer Treatment. Curr Sex Health Rep 9, 32–41 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-017-0095-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-017-0095-4

Keywords

search

Navigation