Skip to main content
Download PDF

Assessment of supportive care needs among cervical cancer patients under treatment in Nepal: a cross-sectional study

BMC Women's Health volume 23, Article number: 407 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Backgrounds

The perceived supportive care needs (SCNs) of cancer patients are essential components of a care program. The first step in planning and intervening for supportive care is the proper identification of the SCNs of cancer patients. Cervical cancer (CC) is the most prevalent cancer among Nepali women. The authors assess SCNs and their predictors among CC patients under treatment by using a validated Nepali version supportive care need survey short form (SCNS- SF 34 N).

Methods

This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in 5 cancer treatment hospitals in Nepal. A culturally adapted and psychometrically validated Nepali version SCNS –SF- 34 N was completed by a convenience sample of 218 CC patients. Data were analyzed by using descriptive (frequency, percentage, mean, median) and inferential (Chi-square P-value and binary logistic regression analysis) statistics.

Results

The study showed that 99% of the respondents were in need of some level (low, moderate, high) of supportive care. The psychological domain, physical daily living, health system information, patient care support and sexuality domain ranked from first to fifth for SCNs with mean and standard deviations 70.29 ± 18.84, 63.25 ± 23.15, 57.90 ± 21.11, 56.46 ± 21.92 and 46.06 ± 34.16, respectively. Binary logistic regression found causal association between SCNs and variables “occupation (p-value = 0.007), and type of hospital (p-value = 0.000)” at a 95% confidence level.

Conclusion

Nepali CC patients perceive and experience many unmet SCNs, with psychological SCNs being the first priority. It is essential that the SCNs of patients may need to be known by their close family members, care providers, CC related program. so that they can offer intervention as per patients’ needs.

Peer Review reports

Background

Globally, cervical cancer (CC) is ranked the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer [1, 2] and the fourth foremost cause of cancer death in women, with an estimated 604,000 new cases and 342,000 deaths in 2020 [1]. In women of low and middle-income countries (LMICs), it is the second most common cancer. According to worldwide data of 2018, 51% of the 570,000 new CC cases occurred in women living in LMICs (88%) compared to those living in middle-income countries [3]. It is the fourth most common cancer and near about 5,70,000 and 3,11,000 new cases and death cases, respectively [4]. In women of the South East Asia region, CC is the second leading cancer and it is the main cause of cancer-related death in LMICs like Nepal [5]. In the worldwide scenario, from 1990 to 2019, the trend of CC decreased, especially in incidence, death, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) with estimated annual percentage change (EAPCs) of − 0.38 (95% confidence interval [CI]: − 0.41 to − 0.34) for incidence, − 0.93 (95%CI: − 0.98 to − 0.88) for death, and − 0.95 (95 CI%: − 1.00 to − 0.90) for disability. Decreasing trends were found in most sociodemographic index (SDI) areas and geographic regions, particularly death and DALYs in Central Latin America with EAPCs of − 2.61 (95% CI: − 2.76 to − 2.46) and − 2.48 (95% CI: − 2.63 to − 2.32). On the other hand, there was a noticeable increasing trend in the incidence of CC in East Asia (EAPC = 1.33; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.55) [6].

In Nepal, CC is the first common cancer among women and it commonly occurs between 15 and 44 years of age, with 2,332 new cases and 1,367 death cases every year [7]. The incidence of CC in National Tertiary Cancer Hospital (B.P. Koirala Memorial Cancer Hospital) in Nepal was relatively constant, 2012–2017 with topmost 605 cases in the year 2016 and lowermost 459 cases in the year 2014. The most common age at diagnosis was 45–59 years (44.6%) followed by 60–74 years (29.4%) and 30–44 years (21.1%) [8]. According to a study carried out in Nepal among CC patients, 75% of the respondents were in equals to and greater than stage II of the disease and the rest (25%) of the respondents were in lesser than stage II of the disease at the time of diagnosis [9] in 2021.

CC is a type of cancer that occurs in the cells of the cervix: the lower part that connects the uterus with the vagina. Human papillomavirus infection is the main cause of CC along with many risk factors like early marriage, early intercourse, having multiple sexual partners, smoking etc. It starts with no symptoms, but later it presents with pain during sexual intercourse and vaginal bleeding. The treatment consists of a combination of modalities such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy [10].

In comparison with other gynecological cancer patients, CC patients face manifold problems such as physical, psychological and social distress, spiritual suffering, fatigue, irritability, memory loss, decreased energy level, recurring pain, worse emotional distress and poor quality of life [11]. CC patients commonly experience anxiety and feel that they are going to die in a devastating condition [12]. According to a hospital-based cross-sectional study in Ethiopia, 79.7% of CC patients experienced anxiety and 47% of CC patients felt depression [13]. With the help of supportive care (SC), patients and family members can manage these disease-related problems in a comprehensive and holistic manner during the disease course [14, 15].

SC starts immediately after the diagnosis; it is a mixture of health services and related activities which help patients and their families in all phases of the disease in a balanced way: diagnostic, treatment, follow-up, and palliative phases of cancer [16]. It is essential to measure and identify the SCNs of CC patients at first for appropriate planning of necessary SC in all phases of cancer disease, including diagnosis and treatment [16, 17].

The supportive care need survey assesses the category and grade of perceived SCNs of cancer patients covering five domains: psychological, health system information, physical daily living, patient care support, and sexuality. It is one of the most complete, reliable and valid SCNs assessment tools for cancer patients [18, 19].

The assessment of SCNs helps to identify individual living needs perceived and expressed by CC patients, which include physical, psychological, emotional, social, spiritual, and practical needs. After the identification of SCNs, healthcare providers can provide targeted SC. SC helps CC patients and their families to cope with cancer symptoms and side-effects of treatments in all phases of cancer: before diagnosis, during diagnostic procedures, treatment phase, and recovering phase of illness or even at the phase of death [20]. SC can provide valuable benefits to patients and their families to handle and cope with the crisis caused by CC effectively [21].

For the assessment of SCNs, several studies have been conducted with various types of cancer patient populations worldwide, most of which are limited to western countries [14, 16, 17, 22,23,24]. Only a small number of studies have been conducted in Asian countries among cancer patients for the assessment of SCNs [25,26,27,28]. The results of these studies conducted in different countries show that there prevail differences in SCNs of patients with different cancer diagnoses [14]. Fatigue, pain, and nausea are the most commonly reported SCNs in gynecological cancer patients, such patients often suffer from psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, and nervousness and CC is one of the most common gynecological cancers [25, 29, 30]. CC patients, in comparison with other gynecological patients, experience relatively a higher level of anxiety and fear that they are going to die in a devastating condition. This type of psychological problem may also bring about social problems. The most common social problems for CC patients include dependency, role dysfunction, loss of productivity and social isolation [12, 31]. Compared to other cancer patients, women with CC show strong concern about sexuality/intimacy issues and information-seeking [32].

CC patients in Seoul shared that they were in need of sexuality and psychological SC to cope up with sexual dysfunction (4.83 ± 4.16) and moderate and severe depression (11.08 ± 5.06)) [33]. CC patients under the treatment in a cancer hospital in Zambia needed psychological supportive care: 80% of patients reported depressive symptoms, 78% moderate, 18% mild and 4% severe [34]. CC patients in Western Kenya experienced several financial challenges and they were in need of financial SC : costs of medication 87%, cost of travel 84% and cost of diagnostic tests 75% [35]. The highest priority of SCNs was identified in the health system information-related domain among CC patients in Thailand [36]. The most common complaint among CC patients was the loss of concentration (85.0%) and symptom management strategies (55.0%), and counseling services (40.0%) were identified as common SCNs in Mainland China [26].

The SCNs of CC patients can be affected by age, marital status, socioeconomic status, dietary habits, site of cancer, and chemotherapeutic agents are reported to be influencing factors on patterns of adverse drug reaction due to cancer chemotherapy and their management in the hospitalized patient [37]. Age, gender, education, ethnicity, occupation and marital status were the influencing factors on the perception of side effects of chemotherapy among cancer patients [38]. Likewise, age, education, remoteness of place of diagnosis and socioeconomic status were the influencing factors associated with late diagnosis of CC in Nepal [39], whereas age, sex, marital status, religion, ethnicity, education, occupation, type of family and economic status were the key factors influencing the quality of lives of patients undergoing cancer treatment [40].

Regarding the SC program for CC patients in Nepal, the population-based cancer registry (PBCR) was initiated by Nepal Health Research Council, a national body of the Government of Nepal, in January 2018. This program is running in 8 districts of Nepal (Kathmandu, Lalitpur, Bhaktapur, Siraha, Saptari, Dhanusa, Mahottari and Rukum). PBCR covers approximately 20% of Nepal’s total population and is expanding [41]. According to Family Health Division, 2010, CC screening (using visual inspection with an acetic acid approach) and prevention programs are running in Nepal complying with the national guidelines developed by the Division of Family Health within the Department of Health in 2010. It targeted to cover 50% population of 30–60 years of age within 5 years, as cited by a community-based intervention study in Nepal [42]. According to a hospital-based cross-sectional study the rate of CC screening in Nepal is poor, only 18.8% of the respondents had done CC screening at once and other remaining respondents had never done CC screening [43].

At present, there exists no national-level cancer control program in Nepal. Only two public-funded cancer centers are available in Nepal, both are located in central Nepal [44]. Additionally, some emerging private hospitals are offering cancer care [45]. Palliative care in hospitals started in Bir Hospital in 1991[46]. After that, Nepal initiated a national strategy for providing appropriate palliative care in all parts of the country only in 2017[44]. At present, most cancer-specific hospitals are treating patients in their own palliative care units. There is also the availability of three oncology palliative centers along with a palliative care unit in the hospital [46, 47]. Palliative care helps to optimize the comfort, function, and social support for patients and their families when a cure is not possible, whereas SC helps to optimize the comfort, function, and social support for patients and their families at all stages of the illness. CC patients in Nepal can get care to optimize comfort, function, and social support in cancer hospitals and palliative care units [20].

The extensive review of the literature on this issue shows that there has been no study in Nepal reporting the assessment of the SCNs of cancer or CC patients. This claim was further substantiated by our search of PubMed database on 1st December 2021 by using 5 search terms: cervical cancer, cancer, supportive care, supportive care needs and assessment.

Out of 286 records, only 16 articles were found to be related to SCNs and 5 of them were review articles not specific to Nepal, and 11 articles reported the studies conducted in other countries, namely in Indonesia, Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, Australia, Northern Ireland, Amsterdam, Canada, Japan, and the USA. Considering this research gap, the researchers aimed to assess SCNs and their predictors among CC patients in Nepal.

Methodology

Aim

This study aimed to identify SCNs and their predictors among CC patients under treatment in Nepal. This study was formally approved by the School of Nursing & Health, Zhengzhou University (ZZU IRB 2019-028), Henan China and Nepal Health Research Council (Ref. No.1706).

Design

A descriptive cross-sectional study design [14, 16, 17, 22,23,24,25, 27, 28, 30] was used to find out the SCNs and their predictors among CC patients in Nepal.

Study setting

This study was carried out in 5 cancer-specific hospitals in Nepal, namely Bhaktapur Cancer Hospital (BCH), Bhaktapur, Nepal and Bisweswar Prasad Koirala Memorial Cancer Hospital(BPKMCH), Bharatpur, Chitwan, Nepal Cancer Hospital & Research Center (NCHRC); Harisiddhi, National Hospital &Cancer Center (NHCC); Jawalakhel, Kathmandu Cancer Center; Tathali, Nepal from October 2020 to March 2021.

In Nepal, there are 38 hospitals, government and private, which provide general and special care and treatment to patients. Among them, 6 hospitals and 2 hospice centers (Bhaktapur Cancer Hospital, Kathmandu Cancer Centre, Nepal Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, National Cancer Hospital, Thankot Hospice, Hospice Nepal, B.P Koirala Memorial Cancer Hospital and Sushil Koirala Prakhar Cancer Hospital) provide cancer-specific care and treatment. Only one out of eight cancer-related centers is a fully government-owned hospital; one hospital is in a public-private partnership, whereas four private hospitals and the rest two are privately-run hospice centers. Four out of the six cancer-specific hospitals are situated in Kathmandu Valley (Bhaktapur Cancer Hospital, Kathmandu Cancer Centre, Nepal Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, National Cancer Hospital,) and the other two (B.P Koirala Memorial Cancer Hospital and Sushil Koirala Prakhar Cancer Hospital) are located out of Kathmandu Valley [41]. Only cancer-specific hospitals were included in this study. Five out of 6 cancer-specific hospitals were included in the current study. Sushil Koirala Prakhar Cancer Hospital, located in the far western region of Nepal, was not included in the study due to a feasibility issue. Likewise, hospice care centers were not included in the study, since their service concentrated only on compassionate care for people in the last phases of the incurable disease.

Characteristics of participants

The inclusion criteria were patients diagnosed with CC, undergoing cancer therapy, physically and mentally able to complete the questionnaire (can speak and give meaningful responses) [25, 26] and understanding the Nepali language.

Operational definitions

Economic status

Economic status was operationally defined by dividing respondents into three categories as per the respondents’ perceived verbal answer about their income: their income is adequate or enough to sustain for one year; their income is not adequate or enough to sustain for one year; and their income is adequate with extra saving.

Relationship status

Relationship status was measured in terms of whether the husband and wife were living together or not from the date of diagnosis of the disease to the date of data collection. It was measured by living together, yes, and not living together, no.

Currently sexually active

Current sexual activity was measured by whether or not respondents participated in sexual activity from the date of diagnosis to the date of data collection. It was measured by yes or no.

Patients with no need for supportive care

The respondent who answered 1—no need, not applicable; and or 2—no need, satisfied; in all 34 items of Supportive Care Needs Survey Short Form 34 Nepali (SCNS-SF 34 N) came under patients with no need for supportive care.

Patients with some need for supportive care

The respondents who answered 3—low need; and or 4—moderate need; and or 5—high need in any one of the 34 items of SCNS-SF 34 N came under patients with some need for supportive care.

Sample size

The sample size was calculated by using G power calculation [48], and the assessment of supportive care needs was conducted with a sample of 218 cc patients. While calculating the sample size, the following parameters were used: Input Parameters = Effect size f2 = 0.15, α err prob = 0.05, Power (1-β err prob) = 0.95, Number of tested Predictors = 19, Total number of Predictors = 34.

Total sample size = 218.

Sampling

The convenience sampling technique was used for the selection of 218 CC patients [16, 17, 25, 49] from the selected hospitals to assess the respondents’ supportive care needs. During the data collection period of 5 months, the principal researcher and the research assistants visited each hospital on a particular day once a week. The CC patients of each particular day from a particular hospital were taken as a sample, and at the end of each week, the total sample from all hospitals was calculated. The enrollment was stopped after getting the required number of participants as a sample from the five hospitals mentioned above.

Data collection tools and procedures

SCNS SF-34 was used as an instrument for data collection. It consisted of 34 items across 5 factors of analytically-originated domains which are the same as the longer version: psychological (10 items), health system information (11 items), physical daily living (5 items), patient care support (5 items), and sexuality (3 items). The tool gives information regarding present needs and degrees of support needed for the patient in the previous month due to cancer (1—no need, not applicable; 2—no need, satisfied; 3—low need; 4—moderate need; 5—high need). A high score in the tool indicates that the level of perceived supportive care needs is high [50].

Translation and cultural validation of SCNS SF-34 was carried out by following Beatons’ Guidelines [51] and content validity assessment [52], followed by the confirmation of the psychometric properties of the Nepali version of SCNS- SF-34 N through explanatory factor analysis [49, 53, 54]. Pretesting was conducted in specified cancer hospitals with 10% of the sample and the pretested samples were not included in this study. The SCNs questionnaire was assessed by using the psychometrically validated Nepali version- SCNS-SF 34 N (Item Content validity index (I-CVI) > 0.78, Scale Content validity index (S-CVI)- 0.91, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from 0.789 to 0.929 for all five domains, and 0.887 for the whole scale, no floor and ceiling effect with 65.48% of the total variance in five domain of questionnaire). Apart from SCNS questionnaires, only demographic-related information was included in the study.

The purpose of the study was explained to the participants, informed written consent was taken, and the questionnaire was provided for completion [17, 49]. For participants who were unable to complete the questionnaire due to poor reading and writing abilities, the researcher and research assistants (Nursing staff, who passed Bachelor’s degree in nursing) helped them via a short interview. Brief training was given to the research assistants on how to collect data before going to the field for data collection [17, 26].

Data analysis

The data were analyzed by using the Statistical Package for Social Science(SPSS) version 20(IBM, NY, USA). Descriptive statistics (frequency, percentage, mean, median and standard deviation) [29, 55] for identification of demographic data and CC-related information, and unmet and met SCNs of participants and inferential statistics (Chi-square P-value and binary logistic regression analysis) [56] were used to predict the factors affecting SCNs among CC patients.

Results

Demographics and disease-related characteristics of respondents

The mean age and standard deviation of the respondents were 53.51 and ± 12.48, respectively. More than three-fourths, i.e. 80.2%, of the respondents were illiterate. In the same way, 49.1% and 32.6% of the respondents were in the 2nd and 3rd stages of the disease respectively. Moreover, 67.9% of the respondents were getting the treatment through radiation and chemotherapy modalities. (Refer to Table 1)

Table 1 Demographics and disease-related characteristics of respondents (n = 218)
Full size table

Patients’ supportive care needs

Worries about those close to them (94%), feelings about death and dying (92.2%), fear about cancer spreading (91.7%), and anxiety (91.7%) were four of the 12 most frequently reported items in the psychological domain of supportive care needs. Being informed about cancer that is under control or diminishing i.e., remission (78.9%) was the most frequently reported item under the health system information domain that contained 9 items. Among 5 items under the physical and daily living domain, lack of energy/tiredness/fatigue (88.5%) was the most frequently reported item for supportive care needs, whereas hospital staff attending promptly to their physical needs (73.9%) was the most frequently reported item under the 5-itemed patient and support domain. Likewise, among 3 items under the sexuality domain, the item concerning the changes in their sexual relationship (61.6%) was the most frequently reported one. Almost all (99.08%) of the respondents stated that they needed some form of supportive care (low, moderate, high).

The majority (i.e. 82.57%) of the respondents said that they t needed some level of supportive care in the physical and daily living domain. In a similar vein, 72.48% of the respondents reported needing some (low, moderate or high) level of supportive care in the patient care and support domain, and 61.01% of them were seeking some support in the sexuality domain. (Refer to Table 2)

Table 2 Item-wise assessment of supportive care needs (n = 218)
Full size table

Domain-wise assessment of supportive care needs

The psychological domain came 1st rank and the sexuality domain came 5th rank of supportive care needs with mean and standard deviations 70.29; 18.84 and 46.06; 34.16, respectively. The overall supportive care needs for the patients were with minimum 16.25, maximum 89.73, mean 55.92 and standard deviation 16.30 (Refer to Table 3).

Table 3 Domain-wise assessment of supportive care needs (n = 218)
Full size table

Association between domains of supportive care needs and selected variables

There was an association between age, marital status, family type, occupation, relationship status, current sexual activity and supportive care needs (sexuality domain), whereas no association was observed between age, education, marital status, hospital type and supportive care needs (psychological, physical daily living and health system information domain). (Refer to Table 4)

Table 4 Association between domains of supportive care needs and selected variables (n = 218)
Full size table

Multicollinearity test

The multicollinearity test was carried out among independent variables associated with domains of supportive care needs. The following table shows the collinearity (relationship) test using Cramer’s V test with the p-value. The test was confirmed at a 5% significance level and were rearranged for model construction. (Refer to Table 5)

Table 5 Multicollinearity test for the predictors
Full size table

Factors affecting different domains of supportive care needs

Binary logistic regression analysis was performed among associated variables after getting the results of the multicollinearity test to assess the effect of factors on domains of supportive care needs. The variables associated with different domains of supportive care needs included binary logistic regression. The physical daily living domain was significant with the currently sexually active status with a p-value 0.012 (AOR = 2.30, 95%CI: 1.20–4.39). The health system information domain was significant with occupation with a p-value 0.007(AOR = 5.5, 95%CI: 1.52–19.90). The patient care support domain was significant with the type of hospital with a p-value 0.000 (AOR = 8.45, 95%CI: 3.18–22.43). The sexuality domain was significant with the occupation with a p-value 0.001 (AOR = 3.04, 95%CI: 0.62 − 0.17) and the currently sexually active status with a p-value 0.000 (AOR = 5.74, 95%CI: 2.74–10.60) (Refer to Table 6 ).

Table 6 Binary logistic regression of factors associated with different domains of supportive care needs among cervical cancer patients (n = 218)
Full size table

Discussion

This is the first study related to the SCNs of CC patients in Nepal. The study discloses different types of unmet SCNs of CC patients in all the domains with the highest prevalence in the psychological domain. The findings of this study would be significant for further planning of CC and cancer care in Nepal.

As findings show, 99.08% of the respondents needed some form of SC. According to Fitch, Page, & Porter (2008), cancer has extensive physical, emotional, social, and financial consequences for affected individuals and their families, and the cancer patients were found to suffer from multiple problems like fear of death, disfigurement, pain, disability, infertility, dependency, abandonment, altered relationships, and financial hardship [14]. Likewise, another study reported that cancer patients commonly struggled with the emotional impact of illness and a lack of control over their lives and they needed emotional, spiritual, informational, and financial support during all phases of treatment [57]. Depression and perceived stress are reported to be common among cancer patients in Nepal [58].

Consistent with our findings, one study in Indonesia with gynecological cancer patients found two categories of cancer (cervical 64.7% and ovary 35.3%). Among them, 96.1% of the respondents sought some need for SC and 3.9% of the respondents did not seek any SC [29].

This study found that CC patients reported the greatest need for SC in the areas of the psychological domain (87.9%). This is because cancer patients most commonly suffered from psychological problems. The main cause of psychological problems can be attributed to cancer diagnoses, treatment methods, and their adverse effects on patients’ thoughts and feelings [59]. According to Wenzel et al., 2002, women diagnosed with cancer may suffer mostly from psychological problems due to changes in their body image, the emerging effects of the disease, prognoses of treatment, and feelings of loss as cited in a phenomenological study in Turkey [60]. CC patients had a higher prevalence of psychiatric symptoms, including depression (33–52%) than patients with other gynecological malignancies [61]. Anxiety and fatigue are commonly identified problems among cancer patients, and among them 11% were CC in a hospital-based prospective study Nepal [37]. This study found the patients’ concern about those who were close to them (94%) as the top priority need in the psychological domain. This finding is supported by the study in Indonesia among gynecological cancer patients who prioritized (89.5%) psychological support to resolve their worries about those close to them [29]. The same study revealed that the patients with gynecological cancer prioritized SCNs related to psychological, physical daily living and sexuality domains [29]. Our finding is also supported by the study conducted in Toronto among lung cancer patients the study found that the highest proportion of unmet needs was related to psychological and physical domains [56]. Another study in California among lung cancer patients reported a high level of supportive care need being necessary in physical daily living domains followed by psychological and health system informational domains. This finding is similar to that of a study with breast cancer patients in Iran which reported patient care support (57.71, mean) being the fourth priority and sexuality (49.39, mean) being the last priority supportive care need [17]. Our finding is also consistent with the finding of the study with breast cancer patients in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia, which found that the highest unmet SCNs were observed in the psychological domain (Mean 53.31; SD ± 21.79), followed by the physical domain (Mean 38.16; SD ± 27.15) [62]. In contrast with the finding of our study, SCNs related to the health system information domain were the first priority SCNs among CC patients in northeast Thailand [36]. The variations in priority and type of SCNs may be due to variations in culture and personal values, sociodemographic characteristics of participants, approaches in the calculation of needs, assessment methods, timing, and sample characteristics [63].

The present research found that sexuality-related SCNs were the least prioritized needs by the participants. According to Byun et al. 2006, this may be because patients with CC were less interested in sexual relations due to more vaginal sexual symptoms such as a shortened and tightened vagina, vaginal dryness, and dyspareunia, compared with their pretreatment situation, as cited in a hospital-based cross-sectional study in Seoul [33]. Higher levels of sexual distress were shown to be associated with higher levels of vaginal sexual symptoms, worry about sexual-related pain, relationship dissatisfaction, and body image concerns [33]. The majority of the participating patients (46.7%), aged between 50 and 59, were in menopause and their sexual desire and hormone gradually decreased, causing both physical and mental changes [33]. With the decrease in sex hormones and aging sexual desire decreases, the vagina narrows, and the lubricant in the vagina decreases leading to a loss in interest in intercourse [64] The decrease in sexual interest may also make patients less likely to require support to meet their sexual needs [33]. Our finding is consistent with the study conducted among CC patients in northeast Thailand: sexuality need was the least priority of the samples (x = 1.63, S.D. = 0.94) [36].

Our study found age, education, marital status, economic status, family type, occupation, hospital type and participation in current sexual activity as the associated variables for SCNs among patients. This study revealed that younger patients had a greater number of unmet needs than older ones. It could be explained that younger patients are completely dependent on their families even to fulfill their basic needs and SCNs are influenced by sociodemographic factors such as age, sex, marital status, and income level and clinical factors such as the location of cancer, stage of disease, and tumor size. Factors influencing SCNs must be identified to ensure adequate care for cancer patients [65]. This finding is supported by the study conducted at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Ontario among lung cancer patients found that younger patients had a greater number of unmet needs and, in contrast to our findings, education was not associated with the need for SC [56]. The present study also revealed that treatment modalities with or without radiation are not the associated variables for SCNs among CC patients. A study conducted in Australia which found that treatment modalities (radiotherapy and surgery) were not associated variables for SCNs among cancer patients [23]. In contrast to this finding, treatment modalities of surgery [24, 66] was the associated variable for SCNs among cancer patients and, surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy were associated variables for SCNs among prostate cancer patients [67]. Sociodemographic and clinical factors (e.g. age, sex, marital status, income level; and clinical factors such as the location of cancer, stage of disease, and tumor size) influence the pattern of perceived and expressed SCNs of cancer patients [65]. Our study also found that factors affecting supporting care needs among CC patients are occupation, hospital type, marital status and participation in sexual activity. This finding is congruent with that of a study carried out in Australia which found marital status and current employment as the factors affecting SCNs among cancer patients [23]. In contrast to this finding, age, and treatment modalities were identified as predictors of SCNs in the sexuality domain among cancer patients in Australia [24].

There are some limitations of this study. First, it adopted convenience sampling which affects the generality of the findings. Second, the participants were asked about their perceived needs for SC in 34 items under five bounded domains (psychological, health system and information, physical daily living, patient care and support, and sexuality), the study, therefore, did not explore the economic, social supportive need and supportive needs of caregivers which are equally crucial to assess SCNs for CC patients. Third, since the inclusion criteria of the study include CC patients of any stage so the perceived need in different stages of the CC may be different like patient in late stage may have more perceived needs than those in initial stage of CC. This may cause bias.

Finally, more than half of the respondents were illiterate and needed assistance in completing the survey. Although research assistants were given training on collecting data from illiterate participants, the participants’ dependency on research assistants might have caused an information bias.

Clinical implications

Although there are some limitations of this study, it has some important clinical implications for the management of SCNs of CC patients and other cancer patients. The results have a significant implication for the kinds of CC patients, targeting and provision of SC services for women with CC who are under treatment. Most of the Nepali CC women under treatment had a high level of SCNs on the psychological domain followed by the physical daily living domain. An effective psychological and physical care intervention plays an important role in fulfilling SCNs as per CC patients’ perceived needs. It may be beneficial to assess SCNs of all cancer patients as routine screening care by using the questionnaire used in this study and a comparison of SCNs can be carried out among various types of cancer patients and intervention can be planned as per the needs of different kinds of cancer patients.

Conclusion

This study pinpoints that Nepali CC patients have several unmet needs in all domains of SCNs with the first priority of SCNs on the psychological domain. Assessment of the SCNs of Nepali women with CC highlighted significant points that should be addressed to improve the care provided. The type of hospital was identified as a factor affecting SCNs. The CC patients who were receiving treatment from government hospitals were more in need of SC than other CC patients who were receiving treatment from non-government hospitals. So, it is necessary to provide sufficient SC for CC patients during their treatment period. All cancer hospitals in Nepal could start assessing the perceived SCNs of individual CC patients as routine care in different phases of treatment. It would be beneficial to address their needs as per the individual patient’s perceived needs, which promotes curing and caring for CC patients. Healthcare providers are to be familiarized with priority SCNs of CC patients. Early recognition and timely addressing of the perceived needs may then help to manage different types of difficulties with health system resources. Intervention studies can be planned on the priority basis of perceived SCNs among CC patients.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

CC:

Cervical cancer

LMICs:

Lower-middle-income countries

SCNS-SF34:

Supportive Care Needs Survey Short Form

SCNS –SF34N:

Supportive Care Needs Survey Short Form Nepali

SCNS-LF59:

Supportive Care Needs Survey Long Form

SPSS:

Statistical Package for Social Science

SD:

Standard Deviation

NHRC:

Nepal Health Research Council

ZZU:

Zhengzhou University

AOR:

Adjusted odd ratio

COR:

Crude odd ratio

References

  1. Sung H, “Global Cancer Statistics. 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries,” CA. Cancer J. Clin, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 209–249, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660.

  2. Naz MSG, Kariman N, Ebadi A, Ozgoli G, Ghasemi V, Fakari FR. Educational interventions for cervical cancer screening behavior of women: a systematic review. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2018;19(4):875–84. https://doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.4.875.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. ” CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Arbyn M, et al. Estimates of incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in 2018: a worldwide analysis. Lancet Glob Heal. 2020;8(2):e191–e203. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30482-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shrestha AD, Neupane D, Vedsted P, Kallestrup P. Cervical cancer prevalence, incidence and mortality in low and middle income countries: a systematic review. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2018;19(2):319–24. https://doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.2.319.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Zhang X, Zeng Q, Cai W, Ruan W. Trends of cervical cancer at global, regional, and national level: data from the Global Burden of Disease study 2019. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10907-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nepal KF. “Cervical Cancer screening and Prevention Project in Nepal,” 2020. https://karunanepal.org/projects/ccsp/ Accessed on 2020/11/27%0ACervical.

  8. Mulmi R, Shrestha G, Pathak A, Sharma M, Dawadi T, Siwakoti B. Trend in incidence of Cervical Cancer in a National Tertiary Cancer Hospital of Nepal, 2012–2017. Nepal J Cancer. 2019;3(1):5–8. https://doi.org/10.3126/njc.v3i1.25907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rai S. Quality of life and sexual dysfunction in cervical cancer survivors. Nepal J Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;16(1):92–6. https://doi.org/10.3126/njog.v16i1.37616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shepherd JH, Surgeon C. Cervical cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;26(3):293–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2011.12.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shirali E, Yarandi F, Ghaemi M, Montazeri A. Quality of life in patients with gynecological cancers: a web-based study. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2020;21(7):1969–75. https://doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.7.1969.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. McCallum M, et al. Supportive care needs after Gynecologic Cancer: where does sexual Health fit in? Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014;41(3):297–306. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.297-306.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kebebew T, Mavhandu-Mudzusi AH, Mosalo A. A cross-sectional assessment of symptom burden among patients with advanced cervical cancer. BMC Palliat Care. 2021;20(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-021-00883-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Margaret I, Fitch, Maamoun J. Unmet supportive care needs and desire for assistance in patients receiving radiation treatment: implications for oncology nursing. Can Oncol Nurs J. 2016;26(1):53–9. https://doi.org/10.5737/236880762615359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gaertner J, et al. Recommending early integration of palliative care - does it work? Support Care Cancer. 2012;20(3):507–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-011-1111-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Whelan TJ et al. “The supportive care needs of newly diagnosed cancer patients attending a regional cancer center,” Cancer, vol. 80, no. 8, pp. 1518–1524, 1997, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19971015)80:8<1518::AID-CNCR21>3.0.CO;2-7.

  17. Rahmani A, Ferguson C, Jabarzadeh F, Mohammadpoorasl A, Moradi N, Pakpour V. Supportive care needs of iranian cancer patients. Indian J Palliat Care. 2014;20(3):224. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1075.138400.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Richardson A, Medina J, Brown V. “Patients ’ needs assessment in cancer care: a review of assessment tools,” Support Care Cancer, vol. 15, no. November, pp. 1125–1144, 2007, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-006-0205-8.

  19. Bonevski B et al. “Evaluation of an instrument to assess the needs of patients with cancer,” Cancer, vol. 88, no. 1, pp. 217–225, 2000, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(20000101)88:1<217::AID-CNCR29>3.0.CO;2-Y.

  20. Hui D, et al. Concepts and definitions for ‘supportive care,’ ‘best supportive care,’ ‘palliative care,’ and ‘hospice care’ in the published literature, dictionaries, and textbooks. Support Care Cancer. 2013;21(3):659–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1564-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Fitch MI. Supportive care framework. CONJ. 2008;18(1):6–14. https://doi.org/10.5737/1181912x181614.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rainbird K, Perkins J, Sanson-Fisher R, Rolfe I, Anseline P. The needs of patients with advanced, incurable cancer. Br J Cancer. 2009;101(5):759–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605235.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Boyes AW, Girgis A, D’Este C, Zucca AC. Prevalence and correlates of cancer survivors’ supportive care needs 6 months after diagnosis: a population-based cross-sectional study. BMC Cancer. 2012;12(150):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-12-150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sanson-Fisher R, Girgis A, Boyes A, Bonevski. The unmet supportive care needs of patients with cancer. Cancer. 2002;88(1):226–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(20000101)88:1<226::aid-cncr30<3.3.co;2-g.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Putri RH, Afiyanti Y, Ungsianik T, Milanti A. “Supportive care needs and quality of life of patients with gynecological cancer undergoing therapy,” Enfermería Clínica, vol. 28, no. Supl 1 Part A, pp. 222–226, 2018, [Online]. Available: file:///C:/Users/Dell/Downloads/S113086211830072X(2).pdf.

  26. Zeng Y, Cheng ASK, Liu X, Chan CCH. Title: cervical cancer survivors’ perceived cognitive complaints and supportive care needs in mainland China: a qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(6):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Uchida M, et al. Patients’ supportive care needs and psychological distress in advanced breast cancer patients in Japan. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2011;41(4):530–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyq230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Surya L, et al. Perceived levels of supportive care needs of the patients with oral Cancer in a Metropolitan City in South India-A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study. J Indian Assoc Public Heal Dent. 2017;15(1):78–83. https://doi.org/10.4103/2319-5932.201933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Afiyanti Y, Milanti A, Putri RH. Supportive care needs in predicting the quality of life among gynecological cancer patients. Can Oncol Nurs J. 2018;28(1):22–9. https://doi.org/10.5737/236880762812229.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Williams N, Griffin G, Farrell V, Rea A, Murray K, Hauck YL. The supportive care needs of women experiencing gynaecological cancer: a western australian cross-sectional study. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4812-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mawardika T, Afiyanti Y, Rahmah H. Gynecological cancer inpatients need more supportive nursing care than outpatients: a comparative study. BMC Nurs. 2019;18:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-019-0355-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Roma Maguire G, Kotronoulas M, Simpson, Paterson C. A systematic review of the supportive care needs of women living with and beyond cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;136:478–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.10.030.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bae H, Park H. Sexual function, depression, and quality of life in patients with cervical cancer. Support Care Cancer. Mar. 2016;24(3):1277–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2918-z.

  34. Paul R, Musa G, Chungu MH. “Prevalence of Depression among Cervical Cancer Patients Seeking Treatment at the Cancer Diseases Hospital,” IOSR J. Dent. Med. Sci. e-ISSN, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 57–62, 2016, doi: https://doi.org/10.9790/0853-1506115762.

  35. Owenga JA, Nyambedha EO. Perception of Cervical Cancer patients on their Financial Challenges in Western Kenya. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3073-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Unjai S, Somjaivong B, Boyes A. Supportive care needs of patients with cervical cancer in the northeast of Thailand. Walailak J Sci Technol. 2021;18(9). https://doi.org/10.48048/wjst.2021.9512.

  37. Thapaliya K, Shrestha A, Prajapti A, Subedi R, Giri S. Study of pattern of adverse drug reaction due to cancer chemotherapy and their management in hospitalized patient in B P koirala Memorial Cancer Hospital. J Chitwan Med Coll. 2015;4(4):24–8. https://doi.org/10.3126/jcmc.v4i4.11967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Gurung S, Pandey RA. Perception of Side Effects of Chemotherapy among Cancer Patients in. J Coll Med Sci. 2016;0657(4):15–20. https://doi.org/10.3126/jcmsn.v11i4.14319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Gyenwali D, Pariyar J, Onta SR. Factors Associated with late diagnosis of Cervical Cancer in Nepal. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(7):4373–7. https://doi.org/10.7314/apjcp.2013.14.7.4373.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Publishing E, Pandey RA, Dhungana GP, Twi JT, Byanju S, Khawas B. Quality of life of patients undergoing Cancer Treatment in B. P. Koirala Memorial Cancer Hospital. Am J Cancer Prev. 2015;3(2):35–44. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajcp-3-2-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Nepal Health Research Council (NHRC)., “Population Based Cancer Registries,” 2018. [Online]. Available: http://nhrc.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Summary-Report_final.pdf.

  42. Shrestha AD, Neupane D, Ghimire S, Campbell C, Kallestrup P. Community-based intervention for cervical cancer screening uptake in a semi-urban area of Pokhara Metropolitan, Nepal (COBIN-C): study protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2021;22(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05049-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Shrestha S, Dhakal P. “Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Regarding Cervical Cancer Screening Among Women Attending a Teaching Hospital, Bharatpur, Chitwan.,” J. Fam. Reprod. Heal, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 18–23, 2017, [Online]. Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29114264%0A. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=PMC5664985

  44. Gyawali B, et al. Overview of delivery of Cancer Care in Nepal: current status and future priorities. JCO Glob Oncol. no. 2020;6:1211–7. https://doi.org/10.1200/go.20.00287.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Adhikari KP. “a Medical Physics Perspective: Radiation Therapy in Nepal,” Med. Phys. Int. J, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 145–147, 2018, [Online]. Available: www.who.int/mediacentre/releases/2003/pr27/en/.

  46. Paudel BD, Dangal G, Munday D. Overview of Palliative Care. Nepal J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;9(2):3–10. https://doi.org/10.3126/njog.v9i2.11724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Gautam P. “Palliative care services in Nepal,” Kathmandu Univ. Med. J, vol. 4, no. 16, pp. 405–408, 2006, [Online]. Available: http://kumj.com.np/issue/16/405-408.pdf.

  48. Kang H. Sample size determination and power analysis using the G*Power software. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2021;18:1–12. https://doi.org/10.3352/JEEHP.2021.18.17.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Han Y, et al. Psychometric testing of the Mandarin version of the 34-item short-form supportive care needs Survey in patients with cancer in mainland China. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(11):3329–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3750-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Boyes A, Girgis A, Lecathelinais C. Brief assessment of adult cancer patients’ perceived needs: development and validation of the 34-item supportive care needs survey (SCNS-SF34). J Eval Clin Pract. 2009;15(4):602–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01057.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Zeneli A, et al. Translation of supportive care needs Survey Short Form 34 (SCNS-SF34) into italian and cultural validation study. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(2):843–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2852-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Gilbert GE, Prion S. Making sense of methods and measurement: Lawshe’s content Validity Index. Clin Simul Nurs. 2016;12(12):530–1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2016.08.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Jansen F, Witte BI, van Uden-Kraan CF, Braspenning AM, Leemans CR, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM. The need for supportive care among head and neck cancer patients: psychometric assessment of the dutch version of the supportive care needs Survey short-form (SCNS-SF34) and the newly developed head and neck cancer module (SCNS-HNC). Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(11):4639–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-016-3307-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Lehmann C, Koch U, Mehnert A. Psychometric properties of the german version of the short-form supportive care needs Survey Questionnaire (SCNS-SF34-G). Support Care Cancer. 2012;20(10):2415–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-011-1351-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Fitch MI, Steele R. Identifying supportive care needs of women with ovarian cancer. Can Oncol Nurs J. 2010;20(2):66–74. https://doi.org/10.5737/1181912x2026674.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Giuliani ME, et al. The prevalence and nature of supportive care needs in lung cancer patients. Curr Oncol. 2016;23(4):258–65. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.23.3012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Evans Webb M, Murray E, William Younger Z, Goodfellow H, Ross J. The supportive care needs of Cancer Patients: a systematic review. J Cancer Educ. 2021;36(5):899–908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01941-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Maharjan S, Purushothama J, Kumar S, Sanal T, Singh DR, ANXIETY AND PSYCHOLOGICAL STRESS AMONG CANCER,”. Int J Curr Adv Res. 2018;7(1):12820–3. https://doi.org/10.24327/ijcar.2018.12823.2268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Okamura M, Fujimori M, Sato A, Uchitomi Y. Unmet supportive care needs and associated factors among young adult cancer patients in Japan. BMC Cancer. 2021;21(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07721-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Yaman Ş, Ayaz S. “Psychological problems experienced by women with Gynecological Cancer and how they cope with it: a phenomenological study in Turkey,” 2016, doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/hlw030.

  61. Klügel S, et al. Concomitant psychiatric symptoms and impaired quality of life in women with cervical cancer: a critical review. Int J Womens Health. 2017;9:795–805. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S143368.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Edib Z, Kumarasamy V, binti Abdullah N, Rizal AM, Al-Dubai SAR. Most prevalent unmet supportive care needs and quality of life of breast cancer patients in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14(26):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-016-0428-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Fielding R et al. “Attributing variance in supportive care needs during Cancer: Culture-Service, and individual differences, before clinical Factors”, doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065099.

  64. Helgason ÁR, et al. Sexual desire, erection, orgasm and ejaculatory functions and their importance to elderly swedish men: a population-based study. Age Ageing. 1996;25(4):285–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/25.4.285.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Okediji O, Salako, Fatiregun OO. “Pattern and Predictors of Unmet Supportive Care Needs in Cancer Patients,” J. Glob. Oncol, vol. 9, no. 4_suppl_2, pp. 117s-117s, 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.1200/jgo.18.51500.

  66. Amane HY, et al. Factors associated with unmet supportive care needs of oncology patients at Dessie Referral Hospital, 2020. Ecancermedicalscience. 2021;15:1–28. https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2021.1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Ream E, et al. Supportive care needs of men living with prostate cancer in England: a survey. Br J Cancer. 2008;98(12):1903–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604406.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the School of Nursing & Health at Zhengzhou University for the great backing to carry out the study and preparation of this manuscript. We are thankful to Nepal Health Research Council and different Cancer-specific hospital in Nepal for permission to conduct the study. We are also grateful to all the participating patients for their invaluable contribution by providing us with the sought information for this study.

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nursing Department, The first affiliated hospital of Zhengzhou University, Jianshe Dong Lu, Henan Province, Zhengzhou, Henan, 450000, China

    Kamala Dhakal & Changying Chen

  2. School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China

    Kamala Dhakal, Panpan Wang, Joanes Faustine Mboineki, Mikiyas Amare Getu & Changying Chen

  3. Maharjgunj Nursing Campus, Maharajgunj, Kathmandu, Nepal

    Kamala Dhakal

  4. Institute for Hospital Management of Henan, Jianshe Dong Lu, Henan Province, Zhengzhou, Henan, 450000, China

    Kamala Dhakal & Changying Chen

Authors
  1. Kamala Dhakal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Panpan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joanes Faustine Mboineki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mikiyas Amare Getu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Changying Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

KD, PW, JFM, MAG and CC contributed to conceptualization and design this study. KD and JFM were involved in data collection and analysis. KD and JFM wrote the first draft of manuscript and PW, MAG and CC finalize the manuscript; finally, the manuscript is reviewed and approved by all the authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Changying Chen.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate

School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Henan, China (ZZU IRB 2019-028), Nepal Health Research Council, Nepal (Ref. No 1706) approved the study proposal. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations (Declaration of Helsinki). Formal permission was granted from the study setting and informed consent was taken from participants before data collection. Formal permission was granted from the study setting, and informed consent was taken from participants before the data collection.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dhakal, K., Wang, P., Mboineki, J.F. et al. Assessment of supportive care needs among cervical cancer patients under treatment in Nepal: a cross-sectional study. BMC Women's Health 23, 407 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-023-02484-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-023-02484-z

Keywords

BMC Women's Health

ISSN: 1472-6874

Contact us