Carmit K McMullen1, Joanna E Bulkley, Andrea Altschuler, Christopher S Wendel, Marcia Grant, Mark C Hornbrook, Virginia Sun, Robert S Krouse. 1. 1 Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon 2 Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, Oakland, California 3 Southern Arizona Veterans Affairs Health Care System and University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona 4 Division of Nursing Research and Education, Department of Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Eliciting the priorities of cancer survivors is essential to address the specific needs of cancer survivor subgroups. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the greatest challenges related to treatment for long-term rectal cancer survivors. DESIGN: This was an observational study with a cross-sectional survey. SETTINGS: The study included members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California and Northwest health plans. PATIENTS: A survey was mailed to long-term (≥5 years postdiagnosis) survivors of rectal cancer who had an anastomosis, temporary ostomy, or permanent ostomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was measured with an open-ended question about the greatest challenge related to cancer surgery. We categorized responses using a grounded theory approach with double coding for reliability. Bonferroni-adjusted χ values were used to assess differences in the proportions of subgroups who mentioned challenges within each response category. RESULTS: The survey completion rate was 61% (577/953); 76% (440/577) of participants responded to the greatest challenge question. The greatest challenges for respondents were bowel/ostomy management (reported by 44%), negative psychosocial effects (37%), late effects of treatment (21%), comorbidities and aging (13%), postoperative recovery (5%), and negative healthcare experiences (5%). Survivors with temporary ostomy or anastomosis were more likely than survivors with permanent ostomy to report late effects (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.01). Survivors with anastomosis were less likely than survivors with permanent ostomy to report negative psychosocial impacts (p = 0.0001). LIMITATIONS: Generalizability is restricted by the lack of ethnically and racially diverse, uninsured (non-Medicare-eligible population), and non-English-speaking participants. Because the survey was cross-sectional and included respondents at different times since diagnosis, we could not adequately address changes in the greatest challenges over time. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal the need for bowel/ostomy management, psychosocial services, and surveillance for late effects in survivorship and supportive care services for all survivors of rectal cancer, regardless of ostomy status. The perspective of long-term survivors with anastomosis reveals challenges that may not be anticipated during decision making for treatment (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A254).
BACKGROUND: Eliciting the priorities of cancer survivors is essential to address the specific needs of cancer survivor subgroups. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the greatest challenges related to treatment for long-term rectal cancer survivors. DESIGN: This was an observational study with a cross-sectional survey. SETTINGS: The study included members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California and Northwest health plans. PATIENTS: A survey was mailed to long-term (≥5 years postdiagnosis) survivors of rectal cancer who had an anastomosis, temporary ostomy, or permanent ostomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was measured with an open-ended question about the greatest challenge related to cancer surgery. We categorized responses using a grounded theory approach with double coding for reliability. Bonferroni-adjusted χ values were used to assess differences in the proportions of subgroups who mentioned challenges within each response category. RESULTS: The survey completion rate was 61% (577/953); 76% (440/577) of participants responded to the greatest challenge question. The greatest challenges for respondents were bowel/ostomy management (reported by 44%), negative psychosocial effects (37%), late effects of treatment (21%), comorbidities and aging (13%), postoperative recovery (5%), and negative healthcare experiences (5%). Survivors with temporary ostomy or anastomosis were more likely than survivors with permanent ostomy to report late effects (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.01). Survivors with anastomosis were less likely than survivors with permanent ostomy to report negative psychosocial impacts (p = 0.0001). LIMITATIONS: Generalizability is restricted by the lack of ethnically and racially diverse, uninsured (non-Medicare-eligible population), and non-English-speaking participants. Because the survey was cross-sectional and included respondents at different times since diagnosis, we could not adequately address changes in the greatest challenges over time. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal the need for bowel/ostomy management, psychosocial services, and surveillance for late effects in survivorship and supportive care services for all survivors of rectal cancer, regardless of ostomy status. The perspective of long-term survivors with anastomosis reveals challenges that may not be anticipated during decision making for treatment (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A254).
Authors: M Jane Mohler; Stephen Joel Coons; Mark C Hornbrook; Lisa J Herrinton; Christopher S Wendel; Marcia Grant; Robert S Krouse Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2008-06-09 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Mary Ann Burg; Gail Adorno; Ellen D S Lopez; Victoria Loerzel; Kevin Stein; Cara Wallace; Dinghy Kristine B Sharma Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Tenbroeck Smith; Kevin D Stein; C Christina Mehta; Chiewkwei Kaw; James L Kepner; Trent Buskirk; Jeremy Stafford; Frank Baker Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-01-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Pamela B Mangu; Patrick J Flynn; Larissa Korde; Charles L Loprinzi; Bruce D Minsky; Nicholas J Petrelli; Kim Ryan; Deborah H Schrag; Sandra L Wong; Al B Benson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Robert S Krouse; Lisa J Herrinton; Marcia Grant; Christopher S Wendel; Sylvan B Green; M Jane Mohler; Carol M Baldwin; Carmit K McMullen; Susan M Rawl; Eric Matayoshi; Stephen Joel Coons; Mark C Hornbrook Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-08-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Amy Downing; Eva J A Morris; Mike Richards; Jessica Corner; Penny Wright; David Sebag-Montefiore; Paul Finan; Paul Kind; Charlotte Wood; Sarah Lawton; Richard Feltbower; Richard Wagland; Sally Vernon; James Thomas; Adam W Glaser Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-01-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Shane Lloyd; David Baraghoshi; Randa Tao; Ignacio Garrido-Laguna; Glynn W Gilcrease; Jonathan Whisenant; John R Weis; Courtney Scaife; Thomas B Pickron; Lyen C Huang; Marcus M Monroe; Sarah Abdelaziz; Alison M Fraser; Ken R Smith; Vikrant Deshmukh; Michael Newman; Kerry G Rowe; John Snyder; Niloy J Samadder; Mia Hashibe Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Joanna E Bulkley; Carmit K McMullen; Marcia Grant; Christopher Wendel; Mark C Hornbrook; Robert S Krouse Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-05-29 Impact factor: 3.603
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
Authors: Virginia Sun; Octavio Bojorquez; Marcia Grant; Christopher S Wendel; Ronald Weinstein; Robert S Krouse Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-11-13 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Carmit McMullen; Joanna Bulkley; Douglas A Corley; Sarah Madrid; Anjelica Q Davis; Rose Hesselbrock; Florence Kurtilla; Charles K Anderson; David Arterburn; Carol P Somkin; Pamala A Pawloski; Nirupa R Ghai; Heather Spencer Feigelson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-06-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Joanna E Bulkley; Carmit K McMullen; Andreea M Rawlings; Robert S Krouse; Melanie C Francisco; Andrew T Sterrett; Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; Pamala A Pawloski; Douglas A Corley; Janice C Colwell; Heather Spencer Feigelson Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Virginia Sun; Elizabeth Ercolano; Ruth McCorkle; Marcia Grant; Christopher S Wendel; Nancy J Tallman; Frank Passero; Sabreen Raza; Zuleyha Cidav; Michael Holcomb; Ronald S Weinstein; Mark C Hornbrook; Robert S Krouse Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-10-16 Impact factor: 2.226