Maria Ture1, Jürgen Barth2, Felix Angst3, André Aeschlimann3, Ulrich Schnyder4, Nic Zerkiebel5, Josef Perseus6, Christoph Renner7, Patrick Imesch8, Bruno Fuchs9, Gerhard Frank Huber10, Heinrich Walt11, Chantal Martin-Soelch12, Josef Jenewein4. 1. Department of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial and Oral Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland; Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 2. Institute of Complementary and Integrative Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 3. RehaClinic Bad Zurzach, Switzerland. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 5. Susenberg Klinik Zurich, Switzerland. 6. RehaZentrum Davos, Switzerland. 7. Oncology Centre Hirslanden Zurich, Switzerland. 8. Department of Gynaecology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 9. Balgrist University Hospital, Switzerland. 10. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 11. Department of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial and Oral Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 12. Department of Psychology, University of Fribourg, Switzerland.
Abstract
QUESTION UNDER STUDY: Rehabilitation for cancer patients aims to reduce physical disability and mental distress resulting from the disease and its treatment. However, little is known about the use of cancer inpatient rehabilitation in Switzerland in relation to sociodemographic and medical characteristics. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate whether there are differences in sociodemographic and medical characteristics between patients who underwent inpatient rehabilitation (users) and those who did not (nonusers). METHODS: A total of 238 cancer patients from the University Hospital Zurich were included. The sociodemographic and medical characteristics of inpatient rehabilitation users were assessed and compared with those of nonusers. We analysed the differences between inpatient rehabilitation users and nonusers. RESULTS: Of the patients included, 101 (42.4%) used inpatient rehabilitation. They were less likely to be employed (p = 0.029), stayed longer in hospital (p <0.001), and were more likely to have semiprivate or private supplementary health insurance (p = 0.030) than nonusers. There were differences in cancer site (p = 0.001). Patients with tumours of the digestive organs or of the thoracic organs were more likely to use rehabilitation, whereas breast cancer patients were less likely to use it. Stratified analyses showed that male patients with semiprivate or private supplementary health insurance (p = 0.037), lower education (p = 0.039), and lower likelihood of employment (p = 0.051) were more likely to use rehabilitation. Women with an advanced tumour stage used inpatient rehabilitation more often (p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Findings show the influence of duration of hospitalisation, insurance type, cancer site, employment status, and gender on the use of inpatient cancer rehabilitation. The results indicate the need of structured standardised procedures for medical referral to be implemented based on screening.
QUESTION UNDER STUDY: Rehabilitation for cancerpatients aims to reduce physical disability and mental distress resulting from the disease and its treatment. However, little is known about the use of cancer inpatient rehabilitation in Switzerland in relation to sociodemographic and medical characteristics. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate whether there are differences in sociodemographic and medical characteristics between patients who underwent inpatient rehabilitation (users) and those who did not (nonusers). METHODS: A total of 238 cancerpatients from the University Hospital Zurich were included. The sociodemographic and medical characteristics of inpatient rehabilitation users were assessed and compared with those of nonusers. We analysed the differences between inpatient rehabilitation users and nonusers. RESULTS: Of the patients included, 101 (42.4%) used inpatient rehabilitation. They were less likely to be employed (p = 0.029), stayed longer in hospital (p <0.001), and were more likely to have semiprivate or private supplementary health insurance (p = 0.030) than nonusers. There were differences in cancer site (p = 0.001). Patients with tumours of the digestive organs or of the thoracic organs were more likely to use rehabilitation, whereas breast cancerpatients were less likely to use it. Stratified analyses showed that male patients with semiprivate or private supplementary health insurance (p = 0.037), lower education (p = 0.039), and lower likelihood of employment (p = 0.051) were more likely to use rehabilitation. Women with an advanced tumour stage used inpatient rehabilitation more often (p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Findings show the influence of duration of hospitalisation, insurance type, cancer site, employment status, and gender on the use of inpatient cancer rehabilitation. The results indicate the need of structured standardised procedures for medical referral to be implemented based on screening.
Authors: Maria Ture; Felix Angst; André Aeschlimann; Christoph Renner; Ulrich Schnyder; Nic Zerkiebel; Josef Perseus; Jürgen Barth; Marius Bredell; Chantal Martin Soelch; Heinrich Walt; Josef Jenewein Journal: J Cancer Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 4.207
Authors: Bettina M Zimmermann; Insa Koné; Michael Rost; Agnes Leu; Tenzin Wangmo; Bernice S Elger Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-05-08 Impact factor: 2.655