- Interventions are multidimensional, encompassing education, psychological and psychosexual support, sexual rehabilitation, symptom management, and relationship-focused elements.
- Delivery is predominantly face-to-face in individual or dyadic formats, with emerging remote digital models, commonly delivered by psychosexual practitioners, nurses, and physicians.
- Gaps include inconsistent specification of relational support, adaptive procedures, and implementation pathways; priorities are earlier integration of sexual care and implementation-focused evidence for sustainability.
Sex Med Rev. 2026 Sep 30;14(4):qeag074. doi: 10.1093/sxmrev/qeag074.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Sexual health is a core component of long-term care for patients with prostate cancer, yet treatment-related sexual dysfunction remains common and existing interventions vary considerably in their definition and delivery. This scoping review aimed to map intervention content, delivery modalities, provider involvement, tailoring approaches, and outcome assessment of sexual health care interventions for patients with prostate cancer, and to identify priorities for future development.
METHODS: A scoping review was conducted using Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, APA PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, ProQuest, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP) were searched from inception to August 30, 2025. Studies were screened against prespecified criteria, and relevant data were charted and synthesized descriptively.
RESULTS: Thirty-one studies published between 2003 and 2025 were included. Most were randomized controlled trials, and the largest number came from the United States and China. Intervention content mainly covered education, psychological support, sexual rehabilitation, symptom management, supportive safeguards, and relationship support. Face-to-face delivery, particularly in individual or dyadic formats, was predominant, although remote and digital approaches were also reported. Intervention delivery commonly involved mental health or psychosexual practitioners, nurses, and physicians. Tailoring was commonly based on patient problems, goals, preferences, psychological status, and clinical or behavioral characteristics. Outcome assessment focused mainly on sexual function and multidimensional prostate cancer-specific measures.
CONCLUSION: Sexual health care interventions for patients with prostate cancer have developed into multidimensional approaches, but relational support, adaptive procedures, and implementation pathways remain variably specified. Future progress should focus on earlier integration of sexual health care into prostate cancer care and on implementation-oriented evidence to support sustainable service delivery.
PMID:42855439 | DOI:10.1093/sxmrev/qeag074
Share Evidence Blueprint
Save to Google Notes
Search Google Scholar
Save as PDF
⭐ My Revision List
