Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of anxiety in endometrial cancer patients undergoing total hysterectomy and to analyze socio-demographic and clinical factors contributing to anxiety, with the goal of informing targeted psychological support and interventions in clinical settings. The study employed a cross-sectional survey design, including 74 patients who underwent total hysterectomy between January 2019 and January 2024 at our hospital. Data were collected through a combination of face-to-face interviews and self-administered questionnaires, conducted by specially trained research assistants or nurses to ensure standardized data collection. Anxiety levels were assessed using the Self-Assessment Scale for Anxiety, categorizing patients into no anxiety, mild anxiety, moderate anxiety, and severe anxiety based on standard scores. Results indicated that 33.78% of the 74 patients experienced varying levels of anxiety: 18.92% had mild anxiety, 12.16% had moderate anxiety, and 2.70% had severe anxiety. Univariate analysis showed significant associations between anxiety and factors such as education level, living arrangement, social support, tumor size, and International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage. Multivariate logistic regression analysis further confirmed that low education level (OR = 1.866, P = .014), unstable living conditions (OR = 2.285, P = .016), inadequate social support (OR = 2.806, P = .044), larger tumor size (OR = 3.328, P = .021), and advanced FIGO stage (OR = 3.762, P = .01) were independent predictors of postoperative anxiety. This study revealed a high prevalence of anxiety among postoperative endometrial cancer patients and identified key influencing factors, including low educational attainment, unstable living arrangements, insufficient social support, larger tumors, and advanced disease stage. These findings underscore the importance of healthcare professionals focusing on high-risk groups to effectively reduce anxiety, improve mental health, and enhance quality of life. Strategies such as enhanced health education, establishment of support groups, provision of psychological counseling, and comprehensive mental health assessments are recommended to address the psychological needs of these patients.
Keywords: anxiety, cross-sectional study, endometrial cancer, hysterectomy, influencing factors, social support
1. Introduction
Endometrial cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors of the female reproductive system, with its incidence rising significantly over the past few decades due to global population aging and lifestyle changes.[1,2] According to the World Health Organization (WHO), endometrial cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women worldwide, with both incidence and mortality rates increasing in China in recent years.[3] While endometrial cancer primarily affects postmenopausal women, its prevalence in younger women is also rising due to shifts in lifestyle and environmental factors.[4] The main risk factors for endometrial cancer include excess estrogen, obesity, hypertension, and polycystic ovary syndrome.[5,6] In clinical practice, surgical resection, particularly total hysterectomy, remains the primary treatment for endometrial cancer.[7] This approach is effective in controlling local tumor spread and significantly improves patient survival rates.[8] With advancements in minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic surgery is increasingly replacing traditional open procedures due to its benefits of reduced trauma, quicker recovery, and fewer complications.[9] Despite these improvements in surgical techniques, postoperative patients continue to face significant psychological challenges, with anxiety being highly prevalent.[10]
Anxiety, a common psychological response to stress, is prevalent among patients with chronic diseases, particularly cancer patients.[11] Postoperative anxiety not only impacts patients’ quality of life but can also delay recovery and negatively influence treatment outcomes.[12] Research has shown that anxiety levels in cancer patients are influenced by several factors, including social support, economic status, education level, disease severity, and type of surgery.[13] In endometrial cancer patients specifically, the incidence of postoperative anxiety varies across studies, but it is consistently recognized as being high and requiring prompt attention from healthcare providers.[14]
Existing literature indicates that socio-demographic factors such as age, marital status, occupation, education level, and economic status significantly impact anxiety levels in patients.[10] For instance, younger patients may experience greater psychological stress due to concerns related to childbearing and family responsibilities, whereas higher education levels and strong social support can help mitigate anxiety.[15] Clinical characteristics, including tumor size, stage, presence of metastases, and surgical approach, also influence patients’ psychological well-being. In particular, patients with larger tumors or advanced-stage disease often face a higher risk of anxiety due to poorer prognosis and more complex treatment requirements.[16,17]
In China, despite the rising incidence of endometrial cancer, relatively few studies have explored the prevalence of postoperative anxiety and its influencing factors. Differences in social support structures, family dynamics, and healthcare resource distribution between Chinese patients and those in Western countries may result in distinct patterns and contributing factors for anxiety.[18] Thus, gaining an in-depth understanding of anxiety and its determinants in postoperative endometrial cancer patients is crucial for developing targeted psychological interventions and enhancing patients’ quality of life.
The role of psychological intervention in cancer treatment is increasingly acknowledged.[19] Appropriate psychological support can effectively reduce anxiety, encourage positive coping strategies, and enhance quality of life. Understanding the prevalence and contributing factors of postoperative anxiety is crucial for developing targeted interventions.[20] By identifying high-risk groups, healthcare professionals can provide tailored psychological support and optimize care plans, ultimately improving the overall treatment experience and prognosis of patients.[21]
This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of postoperative anxiety and analyze its socio-demographic and clinical determinants through a cross-sectional survey of 74 endometrial cancer patients who underwent total hysterectomy. The findings will serve as a valuable reference for clinical staff to better identify and manage high-risk patients during postoperative care, ultimately enhancing the overall treatment experience and prognosis.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study design
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of The Central Hospital of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture. This study employed a cross-sectional design to assess the prevalence of anxiety and its influencing factors in endometrial cancer patients following total hysterectomy. The study protocol received approval from the hospital’s Ethics Committee, and all participants provided informed consent, ensuring their understanding of the study’s purpose, procedures, and potential risks, as well as guaranteeing their right to voluntary participation. Participant privacy was strictly protected, with data used exclusively for research purposes and not disclosed publicly or used for other purposes. The study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of our hospital, ensuring a diverse sample and representative results. Data collection took place from January 2019 and January 2024, covering a complete clinical cycle and reflecting the immediate psychological status of postoperative patients.
2.2. Study subjects
Inclusion criteria: Age: female patients aged 18 years and older. Diagnosis: diagnosed with endometrial cancer and have undergone total hysterectomy. Cognitive ability: able to read, comprehend, and independently complete questionnaires. Consent: voluntary participation with signed informed consent to ensure ethical compliance.
Exclusion criteria: History of mental illness: patients with a history of mental illness or undergoing psychiatric treatment, to avoid interference in anxiety assessment. Serious physical illness: patients with comorbidities of other serious physical conditions (e.g., advanced heart disease, hepatic or renal failure) that could impact questionnaire administration and result accuracy. Cognitive dysfunction: patients with cognitive impairments (e.g., dementia, severe memory loss) unable to understand the questionnaire content. Recent major life events: patients who have recently experienced significant life events (e.g., death of a loved one, divorce) to minimize the impact of external factors on anxiety levels and ensure the internal validity of the study results.
2.3. Data collection
Data collection involved a combination of face-to-face interviews and self-administered questionnaires. For patients unable to complete the questionnaire independently, face-to-face interviews were conducted as an alternative. Self-administered questionnaires improved the efficiency and convenience of data collection. A specially trained research assistant or nurse ensured standardization and consistency throughout the data collection process, minimizing potential human error.
Survey content included: Socio-demographic characteristics (see Table 1), such as age, marital status, education, occupation, income level, and place of residence (urban/rural). Disease-related factors (see Table 2), including International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage of endometrial cancer, surgical method (laparoscopic or open surgery), postoperative treatment (e.g., chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and observation), treatment regimen and number of cycles, time of diagnosis, and comorbidities (e.g., hypertension, diabetes). Psychometric tools (see Table 3), specifically the Self-Assessment Scale for Anxiety (SAS). The SAS is a widely used instrument with strong reliability and validity, suitable for assessing patients’ anxiety levels.
Table 1.
Sociodemographic characteristics of postoperative patients with endometrial cancer (N = 74).
| Variable | Number (n) | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Age (yr) | ||
| ≤45 | 4 | 5.41 |
| 46–55 | 21 | 28.38 |
| ≥56 | 49 | 66.22 |
| Marital status | ||
| Single | 2 | 2.70 |
| Married | 63 | 85.14 |
| Divorced | 6 | 8.11 |
| Widowed | 3 | 4.05 |
| Occupation | ||
| Farmers or migrant workers | 32 | 43.24 |
| Company employees | 14 | 18.92 |
| Civil servants/public institution employees | 9 | 12.16 |
| Freelancers | 2 | 2.70 |
| Unemployed or retired | 17 | 22.97 |
| Educational level | ||
| Primary School or below | 11 | 14.86 |
| Junior High School | 27 | 36.49 |
| Senior High School | 24 | 32.43 |
| University or above | 12 | 16.22 |
| Place of residence | ||
| Urban | 34 | 45.95 |
| Rural | 40 | 54.05 |
| Living arrangements | ||
| Living with family | 63 | 85.14 |
| Other living arrangements | 11 | 14.86 |
| Average monthly household income | ||
| <6000 CNY/mo | 18 | 24.32 |
| 6000–12,000 CNY/mo | 44 | 59.46 |
| >12,000 CNY/mo | 12 | 16.22 |
| Medical insurance status | ||
| Self-paid | 3 | 4.05 |
| New rural cooperative medical scheme | 41 | 55.41 |
| Urban medical insurance | 23 | 31.08 |
| Commercial insurance | 7 | 9.46 |
| Social support | ||
| Low, ≤22 | 25 | 33.78 |
| Moderate, 23–44 | 21 | 28.38 |
| High, >44 | 28 | 37.84 |
Table 2.
Clinical characteristics of postoperative patients with endometrial cancer (N = 74).
| Variable | Number (n) | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Surgical approach | ||
| Laparoscopy | 65 | 87.84 |
| Laparotomy | 9 | 12.16 |
| Extent of hysterectomy | ||
| Total hysterectomy | 48 | 64.86 |
| Radical hysterectomy | 26 | 35.14 |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy/radiotherapy | ||
| Yes | 39 | 52.70 |
| No | 35 | 47.30 |
| Tumor size (cm) | ||
| <4 | 57 | 77.03 |
| ≥4 | 17 | 22.97 |
| FIGO stage | ||
| I | 56 | 75.68 |
| II | 7 | 9.46 |
| III + IV | 11 | 14.86 |
| Histological type | ||
| Adenocarcinoma | 68 | 91.89 |
| Endometrial stromal sarcoma | 5 | 6.76 |
| Others | 1 | 1.35 |
| Metastasis | ||
| No | 69 | 93.24 |
| Yes | 5 | 6.76 |
| Chronic disease history | ||
| Yes | 27 | 36.49 |
| No | 47 | 63.51 |
FIGO = International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.
Table 3.
SAS assessment of postoperative patients with endometrial cancer (N = 74).
| Variable | Number (n) | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Anxiety | ||
| Yes | 25 | 33.78 |
| No | 49 | 66.22 |
| Degree of anxiety | ||
| Mild | 14 | 18.92 |
| Moderate | 9 | 12.16 |
| Severe | 2 | 2.70 |
SAS = Self-Assessment Scale for Anxiety.
2.4. Variables
The dependent variable (outcome) was the level of anxiety, categorized as no anxiety, mild anxiety, moderate anxiety, or severe anxiety based on SAS scores (see Table 3). Independent variables included sociodemographic factors (see Table 1), disease-related factors (see Table 2), and psychosocial factors (see Table 1).
2.5. Statistical analyses
All data analyses were conducted using SPSS 25.0 software. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (mean ± SD) if normally distributed, or as median (quartiles) if not normally distributed. Categorical variables were presented as frequencies and percentages (n, %) to describe the sample characteristics (see Tables 1–3). Differences among groups with varying anxiety levels were compared using 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). For continuous variables, t tests or ANOVA were applied for comparison, while categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test to assess associations with anxiety levels (see Tables 4 and 5). Multifactorial analysis was performed using logistic regression to identify independent factors affecting anxiety, with anxiety as the dependent variable and including significant independent variables from univariate analyses (see Table 7). A significance level of P < .05 was set, and all statistical tests were 2-sided.
Table 4.
Anxiety distribution by sociodemographic characteristics of postoperative patients with endometrial cancer.
| Variable | Number (n) | Percentage (%) | χ2 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 0.502 | .778 | ||
| ≤45 | 2 | 50.00 | ||
| 46–55 | 7 | 33.33 | ||
| ≥56 | 16 | 32.65 | ||
| Marital status | 2.016 | .569 | ||
| Single | 0 | 0.00 | ||
| Married | 23 | 36.51 | ||
| Divorced | 1 | 16.67 | ||
| Widowed | 1 | 33.33 | ||
| Occupation | 4.982 | .289 | ||
| Farmers or migrant workers | 15 | 46.88 | ||
| Company employees | 4 | 28.57 | ||
| Civil servants/public institution employees | 2 | 22.22 | ||
| Freelancers | 0 | 0.00 | ||
| Unemployed or retired | 4 | 23.53 | ||
| Educational level | 9.127 | .028 | ||
| Primary school or below | 2 | 18.18 | ||
| Junior high school | 14 | 55.56 | ||
| Senior high school | 6 | 20.83 | ||
| University or above | 3 | 25.00 | ||
| Place of residence | 0.058 | .81 | ||
| Urban | 11 | 32.35 | ||
| Rural | 14 | 35.00 | ||
| Living arrangements | 5.144 | .023 | ||
| Living with family | 17 | 28.57 | ||
| Other living arrangements | 8 | 63.64 | ||
| Average monthly household income | 1.54 | .463 | ||
| <6000 CNY/mo | 4 | 22.22 | ||
| 6000–12,000 CNY/mo | 17 | 38.64 | ||
| >12,000 CNY/mo | 4 | 33.33 | ||
| Medical insurance status | 4.557 | .207 | ||
| Self-paid | 1 | 33.33 | ||
| New rural cooperative medical scheme | 18 | 43.90 | ||
| Urban medical insurance | 5 | 21.74 | ||
| Commercial insurance | 1 | 14.29 | ||
| Social support | 8.36 | .015 | ||
| Low, ≤22 | 13 | 56.00 | ||
| Moderate, 23–44 | 6 | 23.81 | ||
| High, >44 | 6 | 21.43 |
Table 5.
Anxiety distribution by disease characteristics of postoperative patients with endometrial cancer.
| Variable | Number (n) | Percentage (%) | χ2 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surgical approach | 0.613 | .433 | ||
| Laparoscopy | 23 | 35.38 | ||
| Laparotomy | 2 | 22.22 | ||
| Extent of hysterectomy | 0.392 | .532 | ||
| Total hysterectomy | 15 | 31.25 | ||
| Radical hysterectomy | 10 | 38.46 | ||
| Adjuvant chemotherapy/radiotherapy | 0.164 | .685 | ||
| Yes | 14 | 35.90 | ||
| No | 11 | 31.43 | ||
| Tumor size (cm) | 6.182 | .013 | ||
| <4 | 15 | 26.32 | ||
| ≥4 | 10 | 58.82 | ||
| FIGO stage | 9.326 | .009 | ||
| I | 16 | 28.57 | ||
| II | 1 | 14.29 | ||
| III + IV | 8 | 72.73 | ||
| Histological type | 1.001 | .606 | ||
| Adenocarcinoma | 24 | 35.29 | ||
| Endometrial stromal sarcoma | 1 | 20.00 | ||
| Others | 0 | 0.00 | ||
| Metastasis | 1.647 | .199 | ||
| No | 22 | 31.88 | ||
| Yes | 3 | 60.00 | ||
| Chronic disease history | 0.327 | .567 | ||
| Yes | 8 | 29.63 | ||
| No | 17 | 36.17 |
FIGO = International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.
Table 7.
Unconditional logistic regression analysis of factors influencing anxiety in postoperative patients with endometrial cancer.
| Variable | β | SE | Wald χ² | P | OR | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Educational level (reference: Primary School or below) | ||||||
| Junior High School | 0.624 | 0.255 | 6.008 | .014 | 1.866 | 1.133–3.074 |
| Living arrangements | ||||||
| Other living arrangements | 0.826 | 0.342 | 5.823 | .016 | 2.285 | 1.168–4.470 |
| Social support (reference: high) | ||||||
| Low, ≤22 | 1.032 | 0.512 | 4.062 | .044 | 2.806 | 1.029–7.650 |
| Tumor size (cm) | ||||||
| ≥4 | 1.202 | 0.521 | 5.322 | .021 | 3.328 | 1.198–9.231 |
| FIGO stage (reference: I) | ||||||
| III + IV | 1.325 | 0.513 | 6.665 | .01 | 3.762 | 1.377–10.279 |
| Constant | −1.856 | 0.408 | 20.654 | <.001 | – | – |
CI = confidence interval, FIGO = International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, OR = odds ratio, SE = standard error.
3. Results
3.1. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the study subjects
A total of 74 endometrial cancer patients who underwent total hysterectomy were included in this study. The majority of patients were aged 56 years or older (66.22%), with 85.14% being married, and 43.24% working as farmers or migrant workers. Educational levels were predominantly middle school (36.49%) and high school (32.43%), with 54.05% residing in rural areas. Most patients had a monthly family income between RMB 6000 and 12,000 (59.46%), and medical insurance was primarily covered by the new rural cooperative medical care system (55.41%). Low social support was reported by 33.78% of participants (see Table 1 for details). In terms of disease characteristics, laparoscopic surgery was performed in most cases (87.84%), with total hysterectomy in 64.86%, and 52.70% receiving adjuvant therapy postsurgery. Tumor size was <4 cm in 77.03% of patients, 75.68% were in stage I, 91.89% had adenocarcinoma, and 36.49% had a history of chronic disease (see Table 2 for details).
3.2. SAS assessment of the study subjects
The mean SAS score for the 74 endometrial cancer patients who underwent total hysterectomy was 43.62 ± 8.27. Based on the SAS evaluation criteria, 33.78% of patients experienced anxiety, with 18.92% (14/74) having mild anxiety, 12.16% (9/74) moderate anxiety, and 2.70% (2/74) severe anxiety. See Table 3 and Figure 1 for details.
Figure 1.
Proportion of different anxiety types in the study population.
3.3. Anxiety distribution by sociodemographic characteristics of the study subjects
Anxiety distribution across different socio-demographic characteristics showed that education level, lifestyle, and social support were significantly associated with anxiety (Table 4). Specifically, anxiety was most prevalent among those with lower secondary education (55.56%), while the lowest anxiety prevalence was observed in patients with tertiary education (25.00%), indicating that lower education levels may increase the risk of anxiety. Regarding lifestyle, patients with unstable living situations had significantly higher anxiety rates compared to those living with family members (63.64% vs 28.57%), suggesting that an unstable lifestyle may elevate anxiety risk. Additionally, anxiety prevalence was significantly higher among those with low social support (56.00%) compared to those with high social support (21.43%), indicating inadequate social support as a key factor in anxiety. Other variables, such as age, marital status, occupation, place of residence, family income, and health insurance status, were not significantly associated with anxiety.
3.4. Anxiety distribution by disease characteristics of the study subjects
Anxiety distribution among patients with different disease characteristics showed that tumor size and FIGO stage were significantly associated with anxiety (Table 5). Anxiety prevalence was significantly higher in patients with tumors ≥4 cm (58.82%) compared to those with tumors <4 cm (26.32%), suggesting that larger tumors may increase the risk of anxiety. Similarly, anxiety was significantly more common in patients with FIGO stage III + IV (72.73%) compared to those with stage I (28.57%), indicating that advanced disease stage is a key factor in anxiety. Other variables, such as surgical approach, extent of hysterectomy, postoperative treatment, histological type, presence of metastasis, and history of chronic disease, were not significantly associated with anxiety.
3.5. Analysis of factors influencing anxiety in the study subjects
Multifactorial logistic regression analysis indicated that education level, living arrangement, social support, tumor size, and FIGO stage were independent factors influencing postoperative anxiety (see Table 6 for assigned values). Specifically, patients with junior high school education had a higher risk of anxiety compared to those with primary education or below (OR = 1.866, P = .014). Those with unstable living arrangements had greater anxiety risk compared to those living with family (OR = 2.285, P = .016). Low social support was associated with increased anxiety risk compared to high social support (OR = 2.806, P = .044). Patients with tumors ≥4 cm had a higher risk of anxiety compared to those with tumors <4 cm (OR = 3.328, P = .021). Additionally, patients with FIGO stage III + IV had a higher risk of anxiety compared to those with stage I (OR = 3.762, P = .01). See Table 7 for further details.
Table 6.
Five possible factors contributing to anxiety in postoperative patients with endometrial cancer and their assigned values.
| Factor | Variable name | Assignment description |
|---|---|---|
| Educational level | X1 | Primary School or below = 1, Junior High School = 2, Senior High School = 3, University or above = 4 |
| Living arrangements | X2 | Living with family = 0, other living arrangements = 1 |
| Social support | X3 | High, >44 = 1; moderate, 23–44 = 2; low, ≤22 = 3 |
| Tumor size (cm) | X4 | <4 = 0, ≥4 = 1 |
| FIGO stage | X5 | I = 1, II = 2, III + IV = 3 |
| Anxiety | Y | Yes = 1, no = 0 |
Choose the group considered to have lower risk or be more common in clinical practice as the reference group.
FIGO = International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.
4. Discussion
A cross-sectional survey of 74 endometrial cancer patients who underwent total hysterectomy found that 33.78% experienced anxiety, with 18.92% having mild anxiety, 12.16% moderate, and 2.70% severe. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses identified education level, living arrangements, social support, tumor size, and FIGO stage as independent factors influencing postoperative anxiety.
Approximately one-third of postoperative endometrial cancer patients in this study experienced anxiety, consistent with findings from previous research.[22] For instance, Wang et al[23] reported that postoperative anxiety in cancer patients ranged from 25% to 35%. The high prevalence of anxiety underscores the need for urgent attention and intervention for postoperative mental health issues.[24]
The effect of education level on anxiety was significant in this study. Patients with lower secondary education had a significantly higher risk of anxiety compared to those with tertiary education (OR = 1.866, P = .014). This finding aligns with existing literature, which suggests that low education levels are associated with reduced health literacy and coping strategies, potentially leading to greater uncertainty and fear when facing illness.[25] Additionally, patients with unstable living arrangements had a significantly higher risk of anxiety compared to those living with family members (OR = 2.285, P = .016). This may be because a stable home environment offers more emotional support and security, thereby reducing anxiety.[26] Previous studies have demonstrated a strong link between home environment stability and mental health.[27,28]
Inadequate social support was also a significant factor contributing to postoperative anxiety in this study (OR = 2.806, P = .044). Social support helps patients cope with the stress and challenges of illness by providing emotional, informational, and practical assistance.[29] Lack of sufficient social support may increase anxiety by making patients feel isolated and helpless during recovery. Related studies have indicated that patients with higher levels of social support exhibit better psychological resilience when facing illness.[30]
Tumor size and FIGO stage significantly impacted patients’ anxiety levels (OR = 3.328, P = .021; OR = 3.762, P = .01). Larger tumors and advanced stages often indicate a more complex treatment course and poorer prognosis, which can heighten concerns about disease recurrence and survival, thereby increasing anxiety.[31] Similar studies have demonstrated a positive correlation between disease severity and psychological stress in patients.[32]
The findings of this study suggest that clinical attention should focus on endometrial cancer patients with low education levels, unstable living arrangements, insufficient social support, large tumors, and advanced stages to provide targeted psychological interventions. For instance, health education can be enhanced for patients with lower education levels to improve their understanding of the disease and treatment, thereby reducing anxiety caused by lack of information.[33]
For patients with unstable living arrangements and insufficient social support, coping skills and psychological resilience can be strengthened through support groups or psychological counseling services.[34] Additionally, comprehensive psychological assessments and interventions should be provided for patients with larger tumors and advanced stages to help alleviate disease-related stress.
This study has several limitations. Firstly, the cross-sectional design does not establish causal relationships between variables but only reveals correlations.[35] Secondly, the study had a small sample size, including only 74 patients, which may affect the extrapolation and statistical power of the results. Nevertheless, we believe that this study provides valuable preliminary data for understanding the prevalence and influencing factors of anxiety after surgery for endometrial cancer. However, future studies should consider expanding the sample size to improve the representativeness and statistical power of the findings and ensure their wide applicability and credibility.[36] Finally, the study did not account for certain potential confounding factors, such as patients’ prior mental health status, specifics of family support systems, and personality traits, which may influence postoperative anxiety and affect the internal validity of the results. In addition, the assessment criteria of social support used in this study are relatively simple, and no specific quantitative measurement tools are used, which may limit the accurate assessment of the impact of social support on postoperative anxiety. Future studies should adopt more systematic and quantitative social support assessment methods, such as social support scales, to provide more accurate measurements. The potential effects of other clinical features, such as pathological types and risk of postoperative recurrence, on anxiety levels were not explored in depth. Studies have shown that the type of pathology and the risk of postoperative recurrence may be closely related to the psychological state of patients, so future studies should consider the impact of these factors on anxiety to obtain more comprehensive conclusions.
In conclusion, this study highlights the prevalence of anxiety in postoperative endometrial cancer patients and identifies key influencing factors, including education level, living arrangements, social support, tumor size, and FIGO stage. Clinical focus on these high-risk factors is crucial to improving patients’ mental health and enhancing their quality of life through targeted psychological interventions and support.
Author contributions
Conceptualization: Jing Yang, Huan Liang, Hongcheng Zhu.
Data curation: Jing Yang, Huan Liang, Hongcheng Zhu, Xiaoling Liu.
Formal analysis: Jing Yang, Huan Liang, Xiaoling Liu, Ting Yang.
Investigation: Jing Yang, Hongmei Xiang.
Methodology: Jing Yang, Huan Liang, Hongmei Xiang.
Supervision: Ting Yang.
Validation: Huan Liang, Xiaoling Liu, Hua Xiao.
Visualization: Huan Liang, Hongcheng Zhu, Hongmei Xiang, Hua Xiao, Ting Yang.
Writing – original draft: Jing Yang, Huan Liang, Hongcheng Zhu, Hongmei Xiang, Hua Xiao, Ting Yang.
Writing – review & editing: Jing Yang, Huan Liang.
Abbreviations:
- FIGO
- International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
- SAS
- Self-Assessment Scale for Anxiety
The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose.
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
How to cite this article: Yang J, Liang H, Zhu H, Xiang H, Liu X, Xiao H, Yang T. Current status of anxiety following total hysterectomy in endometrial cancer patients: A cross-sectional study. Medicine 2025;104:12(e41782).
Contributor Information
Jing Yang, Email: 1098673078@qq.com.
Hongcheng Zhu, Email: zhuhongcheng198266@163.com.
Hongmei Xiang, Email: 853493215@qq.com.
Xiaoling Liu, Email: Liuxiaoling8389@163.com.
Hua Xiao, Email: 821576426@qq.com.
Ting Yang, Email: 1098673078@qq.com.
References
- [1].Amant F, Moerman P, Neven P, Timmerman D, Van Limbergen E, Vergote I. Endometrial cancer. Lancet. 2005;366:491–505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [2].Crosbie EJ, Kitson SJ, McAlpine JN, Mukhopadhyay A, Powell ME, Singh N. Endometrial cancer. Lancet. 2022;399:1412–28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [3].Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–49. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [4].Brooks RA, Fleming GF, Lastra RR, et al. Current recommendations and recent progress in endometrial cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:258–79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [5].Felix AS, Weissfeld JL, Pfeiffer RM, et al. Endometrial thickness and risk of breast and endometrial carcinomas in the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer screening trial. Int J Cancer. 2014;134:954–60. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [6].McDonald ME, Bender DP. Endometrial cancer: obesity, genetics, and targeted agents. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2019;46:89–105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [7].Natarajan P, Delanerolle G, Dobson L, et al. Surgical treatment for endometrial cancer, hysterectomy performed via minimally invasive routes compared with open surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel). 2024;16:1860. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [8].Terai Y, Tanaka T, Sasaki H, et al. Total laparoscopic modified radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer compared with laparotomy. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40:570–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [9].Elhage A, Vanderstichele S, Leblanc E, Castelain B, Querleu D. Cancer de l’endomètre: hystérectomie totale simple ou hystérectomie élargie? Voie haute? Voie basse? Contracept Fertil Sex. 1996;24:830–3. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [10].Bortolato B, Hyphantis TN, Valpione S, et al. Depression in cancer: the many biobehavioral pathways driving tumor progression. Cancer Treat Rev. 2017;52:58–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [11].Hofmann SG, Asnaani A, Vonk IJ, Sawyer AT, Fang A. The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy: a review of meta-analyses. Cognit Ther Res. 2012;36:427–40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [12].Carpenter JK, Andrews LA, Witcraft SM, Powers MB, Smits JAJ, Hofmann SG. Cognitive behavioral therapy for anxiety and related disorders: a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Depress Anxiety. 2018;35:502–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [13].Pitman A, Suleman S, Hyde N, Hodgkiss A. Depression and anxiety in patients with cancer. BMJ. 2018;361:k1488. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [14].Marcus D, King A, Yazbek J, Hughes C, Ghaem-Maghami S. Anxiety and stress in women with suspected endometrial cancer: survey and paired observational study. Psychooncology. 2021;30:1393–400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [15].Vasiľková L. Vplyv liečby na kognitívne funkcie a kvalitu života u pacientov s karcinomom semenníkov. Klin Onkol. 2016;29:267–73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [16].Spiegel D, Giese-Davis J. Depression and cancer: mechanisms and disease progression. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54:269–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [17].Grassi L, Caruso R, Riba MB, et al. ; ESMO Guidelines Committee. Electronic address: clinicalguidelines@esmo.org. Anxiety and depression in adult cancer patients: ESMO clinical practice guideline. ESMO Open. 2023;8:101155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [18].Li Q, Lin Y, Xu Y, Zhou H. The impact of depression and anxiety on quality of life in Chinese cancer patient-family caregiver dyads, a cross-sectional study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16:230. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [19].Walbaum C, Philipp R, Oechsle K, Ullrich A, Vehling S. Existential distress among family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychooncology. 2024;33:e6239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [20].Zhang T, Wakefield CE, Ren Z, et al. Effects of digital psychological interventions on physical symptoms in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2023;84:47–59. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [21].Leydon GM, Halls A, Ekberg K, et al. Specialist call handlers’ perspectives on providing help on a cancer helpline: a qualitative interview study. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2019;28:e13081. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [22].Hashemi SM, Rafiemanesh H, Aghamohammadi T, et al. Prevalence of anxiety among breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast Cancer. 2020;27:166–78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [23].Wang YH, Li JQ, Shi JF, et al. Depression and anxiety in relation to cancer incidence and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Mol Psychiatry. 2020;25:1487–99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [24].Wang X, Wang N, Zhong L, et al. Prognostic value of depression and anxiety on breast cancer recurrence and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 282,203 patients. Mol Psychiatry. 2020;25:3186–97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [25].Krebber AM, Buffart LM, Kleijn G, et al. Prevalence of depression in cancer patients: a meta-analysis of diagnostic interviews and self-report instruments. Psychooncology. 2014;23:121–30. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [26].Niedzwiedz CL, Knifton L, Robb KA, Katikireddi SV, Smith DJ. Depression and anxiety among people living with and beyond cancer: a growing clinical and research priority. BMC Cancer. 2019;19:943. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [27].Reblin M, Uchino BN. Social and emotional support and its implication for health. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2008;21:201–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [28].Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL. The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32:705–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [29].Cohen S, Wills TA. Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol Bull. 1985;98:310–57. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [30].Uchino BN. Social support and health: a review of physiological processes potentially underlying links to disease outcomes. J Behav Med. 2006;29:377–87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [31].Aktürk H, Dura MC, Gürsoy B, et al. Comparison of recurrence and quality of life between myoma embolization and myomectomy. Cureus. 2023;15:19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [32].Wu Y, Zhou L, Zhang X, et al. Psychological distress and eustress in cancer and cancer treatment: advances and perspectives. Sci Adv. 2022;8:159. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [33].Ryman C, Warnicke C, Hugosson S, Zakrisson A-B, Dahlberg K. Health literacy in cancer care: a systematic review. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2024;70:102582. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [34].Ziegler E, Hill J, Lieske B, Klein J, dem Olaf von, Kofahl C. Empowerment in cancer patients: does peer support make a difference? A systematic review. Psychooncology. 2022;31:683–704. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [35].Levin KA. Study design III: cross-sectional studies. Evid Based Dent. 2006;7:24–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [36].Button KS, Ioannidis JP, Mokrysz C, et al. Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013;14:365–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]