Literature DB >> 26282636

Identifying Social Distress: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Social Outcomes 12 to 36 Months After Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis.

Penny Wright1, Amy Downing2, Eva J A Morris2, Jessica L Corner2, Mike A Richards2, David Sebag-Montefiore2, Paul Finan2, Adam W Glaser2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To establish the prevalence and determinants of poor social outcomes after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: All 12- to 36-month survivors of CRC (International Classification of Diseases [10th revision] codes C18 to C20) diagnosed in 2010 or 2011 and treated in the English National Health Service were identified and sent a questionnaire from their treating cancer hospital. This included the Social Difficulties Inventory, a 16-item scale of social distress (SD) comprising everyday living, money matters, and self and others subscales, plus five single items. Sociodemographic and clinical data were also collected. Analyses using descriptive statistics, χ(2) tests, and logistic regression models were conducted.
RESULTS: Response rate was 63.3% (21,802 of 34,467). Of the 21,802 participants, 17,830 (81.8%) completed all SD items; 2,688 (15.1%) of these 17,830 respondents were classified as experiencing SD (everyday living, 19.5%; money matters, 15.6%; self and others, 18.1%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated having ≥ three long-term conditions was the strongest predictor of SD (odds ratio [OR], 6.64; 95% CI, 5.67 to 7.77 compared with no long-term conditions), followed by unemployment (OR, 5.11; 95% CI, 4.21 to 6.20 compared with being employed), having recurrent or nontreatable disease (OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 2.49 to 3.04 compared with being in remission), and having a stoma (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.86 to 2.36 compared with no stoma). Additional predictors of SD were young age (< 55 years), living in a more deprived area, nonwhite ethnicity, having advanced-stage disease, having undergone radiotherapy, and being a carer.
CONCLUSION: Although it is reassuring a majority do not experience social difficulties, a minority reported significant SD 12 to 36 months after diagnosis of CRC. The identified clinical and social risk factors are easy to establish and should be used to target support.
© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26282636     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.60.6129

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  12 in total

1.  Letter to the Editor in response to Greidanus et al., June 2020, "The Successful Return-To-Work Questionnaire for Cancer Survivors (I-RTW_CS): Development, Validity and Reproducibility".

Authors:  Masamitsu Kobayashi; Jun Kako; Kohei Kajiwara; Ayako Ogata
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Empowering survivors after colorectal and lung cancer treatment: Pilot study of a Self-Management Survivorship Care Planning intervention.

Authors:  Anne Reb; Nora Ruel; Marwan Fakih; Lily Lai; Ravi Salgia; Betty Ferrell; Sagus Sampath; Jae Y Kim; Dan J Raz; Virginia Sun
Journal:  Eur J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 2.398

3.  Sexual Function and Health-Related Quality of Life in Long-Term Rectal Cancer Survivors.

Authors:  Virginia Sun; Marcia Grant; Christopher S Wendel; Carmit K McMullen; Joanna E Bulkley; Lisa J Herrinton; Mark C Hornbrook; Robert S Krouse
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 3.802

4.  Regarding: Humayra Rashid et al. (2020) Returning to work in lung cancer survivors-a multi-center cross-sectional study in Germany. Supp Care Cancer; Published 19 November 2020.

Authors:  Masamitsu Kobayashi; Jun Kako; Kohei Kajiwara; Ayako Ogata
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Life after prostate cancer diagnosis: protocol for a UK-wide patient-reported outcomes study.

Authors:  Amy Downing; Penny Wright; Richard Wagland; Eila Watson; Therese Kearney; Rebecca Mottram; Majorie Allen; Victoria Cairnduff; Oonagh McSorley; Hugh Butcher; Luke Hounsome; Conan Donnelly; Peter Selby; Paul Kind; William Cross; James W H Catto; Dyfed Huws; David H Brewster; Emma McNair; Lauren Matheson; Carol Rivas; Johana Nayoan; Mike Horton; Jessica Corner; Julia Verne; Anna Gavin; Adam W Glaser
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 6.  Patient-reported outcome measures of the impact of cancer on patients' everyday lives: a systematic review.

Authors:  Susan Catt; Rachel Starkings; Valerie Shilling; Lesley Fallowfield
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 4.442

Review 7.  Effect of psychosocial interventions on the quality of life of patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Heesook Son; Youn-Jung Son; Hyerang Kim; Yoonju Lee
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 3.186

8.  Exploring the characteristics and potential disparities of non-migrant and migrant colorectal cancer patients regarding their satisfaction and subjective perception of care - a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Marja Leonhardt; Katja Aschenbrenner; Martin E Kreis; Johannes C Lauscher
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 9.  Social support for older adults with cancer: Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology review paper.

Authors:  Sindhuja Kadambi; Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis; Tullika Garg; Kah Poh Loh; Jessica L Krok-Schoen; Nicolò Matteo Luca Battisti; Gordon Taylor Moffat; Luiz A Gil-Jr; Supriya Mohile; Tina Hsu
Journal:  J Geriatr Oncol       Date:  2019-10-15       Impact factor: 3.929

10.  Health-related quality of life after treatment for bladder cancer in England.

Authors:  Samantha J Mason; Amy Downing; Penny Wright; Luke Hounsome; Sarah E Bottomley; Jessica Corner; Mike Richards; James W Catto; Adam W Glaser
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.