Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-46n74 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T11:38:51.842Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Impact of treatment on the quality of life of patients with cervical cancer at a tertiary facility in sub-Saharan Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

Robert Amoh
Affiliation:
Department of Radiography, University of Ghana, Legon, Accra, Ghana Oncology Directorate, Komfo-Anokye Teaching Hospital, Kumasi, Ghana
Hannah Naa Gogwe Ayettey Anie*
Affiliation:
National Radiotherapy Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Centre, Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana
Kofi Adesi Kyei
Affiliation:
Department of Radiography, University of Ghana, Legon, Accra, Ghana National Radiotherapy Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Centre, Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana
Andrew Yaw Nyantakyi
Affiliation:
National Radiotherapy Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Centre, Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana Department of Oncology, Cape Coast Teaching Hospital, Cape Coast, Ghana
Joseph Daniels
Affiliation:
National Radiotherapy Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Centre, Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana Department of Oncology, Cape Coast Teaching Hospital, Cape Coast, Ghana
*
Corresponding author: Hannah Naa Gogwe Ayettey Anie; Email: ayetteyhannah@yahoo.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

Cervical cancer remains a significant public health concern in sub-Saharan Africa, with treatment modalities such as chemoradiotherapy impacting patients’ quality of life (QoL). This study assessed the QoL of cervical cancer patients undergoing definitive chemoradiotherapy.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study was conducted at the National Radiotherapy, Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Centre, Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, between February and May 2023. A total of 120 adult female cervical cancer patients, treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy, were purposively recruited. Data were collected using the FACT-Cx questionnaire, which assessed physical, social, emotional and functional well-being as well as additional concerns. Statistical analysis included descriptive and inferential methods with Spearman Rho used to examine correlations.

Results:

The mean age of participants was 53·5 years (SD 15·6), with most (77%) employed and half (50%) married. QoL scores were highest in social well-being (mean = 17·3/24·0) and emotional well-being (mean = 16·8/24·0), but lower in physical (mean = 15·4/28·0) and functional well-being (mean = 12·3/24·0). Most participants (66·7%) reported a good QoL, while 6·7% reported poor QoL. Key challenges included fatigue, pain and dissatisfaction with sex life, although participants received strong emotional support from their families. Correlations between age and QoL domains were statistically insignificant (p > 0·05).

Conclusions:

The findings suggest that despite the physical and functional challenges faced during chemoradiotherapy, most participants reported good overall QoL, largely attributed to strong family and social support. Future studies should incorporate longitudinal designs with baseline data collection to better understand treatment-related changes in QoL.

Information

Type
Original Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the study participants (N = 120)

Figure 1

Table 2. Physical well-being of patients with cervical cancer (N = 120)

Figure 2

Table 3. Social well-being of the study participants (N = 120)

Figure 3

Table 4. Emotional well-being of the study participants (N = 120)

Figure 4

Table 5. Functional well-being of the study participants (N = 120)

Figure 5

Table 6. Additional concerns of patients (N = 120)

Figure 6

Table 7. Descriptive analysis of total scores

Figure 7

Figure 1. Distribution of the QoL of participants.

Figure 8

Table 8. Correlation between patients’ age and QoL domains