Relationships between health literacy, having a cancer care coordinator, and long-term health-related quality of life among cancer survivors

Inequalities in patients' experiences with cancer care: the role of economic and health literacy determinants

BACKGROUND

Patients with fewer socioeconomic and health literacy resources are disadvantaged in their access and use of healthcare, which may give rise to worse experiences with care and thus inequalities in patient experiences. However, only a limited number of studies have examined how socioeconomic and health literacy factors shape inequalities in patients' experiences with cancer care.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether patients' experiences with cancer care differ according to their economic status and health literacy.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data on 2789 adult patients diagnosed with cancer from the Swiss Cancer Patient Experiences-2 (SCAPE-2) study, a cross-sectional survey conducted in eight hospitals across Switzerland from September 2021 to February 2022. Regression analysis was applied to examine the independent effect of patients' economic status and health literacy on various outcomes of experiences with cancer care, covering eight different dimensions of patient-centred care, controlling for confounding factors.

RESULTS

Adjusted regression analysis showed that patients with lower economic status reported significantly worse experiences with cancer care in 12 out of 29 specific care experiences, especially in the dimensions of 'respect for patients' preferences' and 'physical comfort' where all items of experiences were associated with economic status. Additionally, lower health literacy was associated with worse patient experiences in 23 specific care experiences. All items in the dimensions of 'respect for patients' preferences', 'physical comfort' and 'emotional support' were associated with health literacy.

DISCUSSION

This study revealed significant inequalities in experiences with cancer care shaped by the economic status and health literacy of patients across different dimensions of patient-centred care. It is essential to address the needs of more disadvantaged patients who face obstacles in their access and use of the healthcare system, not only to mitigate inequalities in cancer care but also to avoid inequalities in health outcomes.

Feasibility of delivering survivorship care via lay health educators: A pilot randomized controlled trial among rural cancer survivors

PURPOSE

We tested the feasibility of survivorship care plan (SCP) delivery with/without a lay health educator (LHE) telephone-delivered information session among rural cancer survivors, and their effects on health-related self-efficacy and knowledge of cancer history.

METHODS

Randomized trial of cancer survivors from 3 rural oncology clinics featuring either SCP alone (control) or SCP plus LHE-delivered information session (intervention). Participants completed a questionnaire on health-related self-efficacy and knowledge of cancer-specific medical history. Responses were compared to medical records for accuracy. SCPs were then mailed to participants. Approximately 5 months later, participants completed a follow-up questionnaire. A subset of participants took part in subsequent qualitative interviews about their study experience.

FINDINGS

Of 301 survivors approached, 72 (23.9%) were randomized (mean age 66.4 years; 3.1 years from diagnosis; 62.5% female), and 65 (90.3%) completed the study. Global mental and physical health or self-efficacy scores did not change significantly from baseline to follow-up for either group. In exploratory analyses, self-efficacy increased in participants with inadequate/marginal health literacy in the intervention arm (+0.7, 95% CI = 0.1-1.2; P = .01). Accuracy of knowledge did not improve but was high at baseline (mean 76.0±14.5%). 60.1% and 48.4% of control and intervention participants, respectively, found SCPs definitely/somewhat useful. Qualitative data (n = 20) suggested that SCPs were helpful to patients when primary and oncology care were less integrated.

CONCLUSIONS

An LHE-delivered informational session was feasible but had limited benefit to rural cancer survivors versus delivery of SCP alone but may be of benefit to patients with low health literacy or with less integrated care.

Health literacy among cancer survivors: Results from the 2016 behavioral risk factor surveillance system survey

Health literacy is a set of knowledge and skills that enables individuals to obtain, communicate, process and understand information, and services to make appropriate health decisions and to successfully navigate the health care system. Health literacy is important to quality of cancer survivorship care and patient self-management of their disease.We examined health literacy among cancer survivors, using data from the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We compared health literacy across various demographic and socioeconomic groups and estimated the adjusted odds in favor of low health literacy for these characteristics.We found that about 16% of the cancer survivors had low health literacy. The prevalence was higher among Hispanic and Black individuals, and among those with poor health status, low income and educational attainment.A sizeable percentage of cancer survivors have low health literacy which is likely to complicate their ability to self-manage their disease and navigate the health care system for optimal care. In order to ensure the quality and appropriateness of cancer survivorship care, effective interventions are needed to address low health literacy in these populations.

Cancer as a Chronic Illness in Colombia: A Normative Consensus Approach to Improving Healthcare Services for those Living with and beyond Cancer and Its Treatment

Cancer survivorship care in Colombia is of increasing importance. International survivorship initiatives and studies show that continuing symptoms, psychological distress, and late effects impact the quality of life for survivors. Priorities for quality survivorship according to Colombian patients and clinicians are unknown. We undertook a nominal consensus approach with 24 participants using virtual meeting technology to identify the priorities for cancer survivorship. We applied an iterative approach conducted over eight weeks with five workshops and one patient focus group followed by a priority setting survey. The consensus group established six main themes, which were subsequently evaluated by experts: (i) symptoms and secondary effects of cancer; (ii) care coordination to increase patient access and integration of cancer care; (iii) psychosocial support after cancer treatment; (iv) mapping information resources and available support services for long-term cancer care; (v) identifying socioeconomic and regional inequalities in cancer survival to improve care and outcomes; and (vi) health promotion and encouraging lifestyle change. The order of priorities differed between clinicians and patients: patients mentioned psychosocial support as the number one priority, and clinicians prioritized symptoms and surveillance for cancer recurrence. Developing survivorship care needs consideration of both views, including barriers such as access to services and socioeconomic disparities.