Tertiary prevention: implications for improving the quality of life of long-term survivors of cancer

Self-rated health in relation to fruit and vegetable consumption and physical activity among older cancer survivors

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate associations of self-rated health with fruit and vegetable consumption (FVC) and physical activity (PA) among older cancer survivors.

METHODS

We used the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to identify cancer survivors ≥ 65 years (N = 2663). Self-reported FVC and PA were categorized as ordinal variables to approximate quartiles. Low general health (LGH) was defined as fair or poor self-rated health. A multivariable logistic regression treating LGH as the outcome was used to calculate adjusted odd ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for FVC and PA. Restricted cubic spline depicted non-linear dose-response curves for FVC and PA. In comparative analysis, we used the same logistic regression and dose-response model to calculate ORs of FVC and PA in 73,134 people ≥ 65 years without cancer history.

RESULTS

Overall, 470 (17.7%) survivors had LGH. Survivors' mean age was 73.3 years (SD = 5.2), 55.1% of them were female, and 95.4% self-reported as white. In cancer survivors, FVC was not associated with LGH (≥ 28 vs. < 14 times/week: aOR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.75-1.39, p-trend = 0.50), whereas PA was inversely associated with LGH (≥ 30 vs. < 7 MET-hours/week: aOR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.41-0.75, p-trend < 0.01). Dose-response curves demonstrated consistent association patterns. In comparative analysis, ORs of PA did not change substantially but we observed inverse association for FVC.

CONCLUSIONS

An inverse association between PA and LGH was observed among older cancer survivors, but no significant association was obtained for FVC among them. Regular PA may maintain or indicate a favorable health in older cancer survivors, whereas impacts of FVC deserve further investigations.

Cancer Prevention in the Survivorship Setting

OBJECTIVES

To describe how nurses can use risk reduction and health promotion activities to facilitate surveillance of late effects and secondary cancers in long-term cancer survivors.

DATA SOURCES

Literature review on survivorship, nursing practice, cancer prevention, and survivorship; articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals; and Web-based or professional organization resources.

CONCLUSION

Appropriate participation in screening activities, early detection of cancer, and further advances in treatment have contributed to the rise in cancer survivors. A demand for nurses with clinical experience and competence in survivorship care will follow.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Oncology nurses have an essential role in providing safe and high-quality care throughout the survivorship experience, which can contribute to better long-term outcomes.

Breast Cancer Survivorship Care: Targeting a Colorectal Cancer Education Intervention

Breast cancer survivors are at risk of developing a second primary cancer. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading second primary cancers, and it is often preventable. We developed a multi-component educational tool to inform and encourage women breast cancer survivors to engage in CRC screening. To assess the strengths and weakness of the tool and to improve the relevancy to the target audience, we convened four focus groups of women breast cancer survivors in Missouri. We also assessed the potential impact of the tool on the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding CRC and collected information on the barriers to CRC screening through pre- and post-focus groups' questionnaires. A total of 43 women breast cancer survivors participated and provided very valuable suggestions on design and content to update the tool. Through the process and comparing pre- and post-focus group assessments, a significantly higher proportion of breast cancer survivors strongly agreed or agreed that CRC is preventable (78.6% vs. 96.9%, p = 0.02) and became aware that they were at a slightly increased risk for CRC (18.6% vs. 51.7%, p = 0.003). The most cited barrier was the complexity of preparation for colonoscopy.

Public health and cooperative group partnership: a colorectal cancer intervention

OBJECTIVES

To describe the development of a multi-component colorectal cancer educational tool for female breast cancer survivors through a cooperative group and public health partnership.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, World Wide Web, guidelines from professional organizations, surveys and focus groups with breast cancer survivors.

CONCLUSION

Collaboration is at the core of cooperative group and public health research. This partnership led to the development of a colorectal cancer educational tool for breast cancer survivors. Focus groups revealed that female breast cancer survivors were receptive to education on colorectal cancer screening.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Nurses are instrumental in research collaborations between cooperative groups and public health. The colorectal educational intervention for breast cancer survivors serves as an exemplar of partnerships leading to innovative research planning and implementation outcomes.

Quality of life among long-term gynaecological cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

The population of gynaecological cancer survivors is growing. However, there is little knowledge of the long-term quality of life among these former patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term quality of life in women treated successfully for gynaecological cancer and a control group of representative women selected from the general population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study comprised women aged 30-75 years residing in the central part of Norway. Cases were 319 gynaecological cancer survivors treated at St Olav's Hospital Trondheim, Norway, between 1987 and 1996, whereas 1276 age-matched women selected at random from the general population served as controls. The study population was identified and the respondents were invited to answer a postal questionnaire. After one reminder, the response rate was 55% (176/319) and 41% (521/1276) for cases and controls, respectively. Sixteen cases and 28 controls had incomplete responses to most questions and were excluded from the analyses. Eligible for the final analyses were 160 cases and 493 controls. Ferrans & Powers' Quality of Life Index (QLI) was used. All analyses were performed in SPSS version 13.0 with chi-square (categorical variables) and Mann-Whitney (continuous variables) tests. p <or= 0.05 is the level of statistical significance.

RESULTS

Cases had on an average, a complete recurrence-free period of 12 years (range 7-18). No differences were detected between cases and controls in the global quality of life or in any of the four sub-dimensions of QLI. Furthermore, no difference was found in co-morbidity, but cases consulted more often hospital physicians than controls did.

INTERPRETATION

Long-term gynaecological cancer survivors enjoy the same quality of life as women in the general population.