Literature DB >> 25421082

The location of surgical care for rural patients with rectal cancer: patterns of treatment and patient perspectives.

Michelle C Nostedt1, Andrew M McKay1, David J Hochman1, Debrah A Wirtzfeld1, Clifford S Yaffe1, Benson Yip1, Richard Silverman1, Jason Park1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Where cancer patients receive surgical care has implications on policy and planning and on patients' satisfaction and outcomes. We conducted a population- based analysis of where rectal cancer patients undergo surgery and a qualitative analysis of rectal cancer patients' perspectives on location of surgical care.
METHODS: We reviewed Manitoba Cancer Registry data on patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosed between 2004 and 2006. We interviewed rural patients with rectal cancer regarding their preferences and the factors they considered when deciding on treatment location. Interview data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach.
RESULTS: From 2004 to 2006, 2086 patients received diagnoses of CRC in Manitoba (colon: 1578, rectal: 508). Among rural patients (n = 907), those with rectal cancer were more likely to undergo surgery at an urban centre than those with colon cancer (46.5% v. 28.8%, p < 0.001). Twenty rural patients with rectal cancer participated in interviews. We identified 3 major themes from the interview data: the decision-maker, treatment factors and personal factors. Participants described varying input into referral decisions, and often they did not perceive a choice regarding treatment location. Treatment factors, including surgeon factors and hospital factors, were important when considering treatment location. Personal factors, including travel, support, accommodation, finances and employment, also affected participants' treatment experiences.
CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of rural patients with rectal cancer undergo surgery at urban centres. The reasons are complex and only partly related to patient choice. Further studies are required to better understand cancer system access in geographically dispersed populations and to support cancer patients through the decision-making and treatment processes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25421082      PMCID: PMC4245270          DOI: 10.1503/cjs.002514

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Surg        ISSN: 0008-428X            Impact factor:   2.089


  23 in total

1.  Empirical assessment of the effect of different summary worklife exposure measures on the estimation of risk in case-referent studies of occupational cancer.

Authors:  M E Suarez-Almazor; C L Soskolne; K Fung; G S Jhangri
Journal:  Scand J Work Environ Health       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 5.024

2.  What influences decisions around the place of care for terminally ill cancer patients?

Authors:  Kathryn McCall; Ann Marie Rice
Journal:  Int J Palliat Nurs       Date:  2005-10

3.  Patient expectations of functional outcomes after rectal cancer surgery: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Jason Park; Heather B Neuman; Antonia V Bennett; Lily Polskin; P Terry Phang; W Douglas Wong; Larissa K Temple
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.585

4.  Hospital and surgeon procedure volume as predictors of outcome following rectal cancer resection.

Authors:  Deborah Schrag; Katherine S Panageas; Elyn Riedel; Laura D Cramer; Jose G Guillem; Peter B Bach; Colin B Begg
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  Surgeon-related factors and outcome in rectal cancer.

Authors:  G A Porter; C L Soskolne; W W Yakimets; S C Newman
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Variations in treatment of rectal cancer: the influence of hospital type and caseload.

Authors:  A J Simons; R Ker; S Groshen; C Gee; G J Anthone; A E Ortega; P Vukasin; R K Ross; R W Beart
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Choosing where to have major surgery: who makes the decision?

Authors:  Chad T Wilson; Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2007-03

8.  Hospital caseload and the results achieved in patients with rectal cancer.

Authors:  F Marusch; A Koch; U Schmidt; M Pross; I Gastinger; H Lippert
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 6.939

9.  Impact of hospital procedure volume on surgical operation and long-term outcomes in high-risk curatively resected rectal cancer: findings from the Intergroup 0114 Study.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Joel E Tepper; Donna Niedzwiecki; Donna R Hollis; Deborah Schrag; John Z Ayanian; Michael J O'Connell; Jane C Weeks; Robert J Mayer; Christopher G Willett; John S MacDonald; Al B Benson; Charles S Fuchs
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-01-01       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Patient care is a collective responsibility: perceptions of professional responsibility in surgery.

Authors:  Jason Park; Sarah I Woodrow; Richard K Reznick; Jennifer Beales; Helen M MacRae
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.982

View more
  3 in total

1.  Pediatric Cancers among Alaska Native People.

Authors:  Sarah H Nash; Garrett Zimpelman; Laura Schulz; Matthew Hirschfeld
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2020-07-15       Impact factor: 4.406

Review 2.  Patient Mobility for Elective Secondary Health Care Services in Response to Patient Choice Policies: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ajay Aggarwal; Daniel Lewis; Malcolm Mason; Richard Sullivan; Jan van der Meulen
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 2.971

3.  Effect of patient choice and hospital competition on service configuration and technology adoption within cancer surgery: a national, population-based study.

Authors:  Ajay Aggarwal; Daniel Lewis; Malcolm Mason; Arnie Purushotham; Richard Sullivan; Jan van der Meulen
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2017-10-03       Impact factor: 41.316

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.