Myles Balfe1, Kieran Keohane2, Katie O' Brien3, Rachael Gooberman-Hill4, Rebecca Maguire5, Paul Hanly6, Eleanor O' Sullivan7, Linda Sharp8. 1. Dept. of Sociology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. Electronic address: m.balfe@ucc.ie. 2. Dept. of Sociology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. Electronic address: k.keohane@ucc.ie. 3. National Cancer Registry, Cork, Ireland. Electronic address: K.obrien@ncri.ie. 4. School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Electronic address: r.gooberman-hill@bristol.ac.uk. 5. Dept. of Psychology, National College of Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. Electronic address: Rebecca.maguire@ncirl.ie. 6. Health Economics, National College of Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. Electronic address: paul.hanly@ncirl.ie. 7. Dept. of Dental Surgery, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. Electronic address: Eleanor.osullivan@ucc.ie. 8. Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, UK. Electronic address: Linda.sharp@newcastle.ac.uk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore the effect that treatment-related commuting has on carers of patients with head and neck cancer. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews, thematically analysed, with 31 carers. RESULTS: Treatment-related commuting had a considerable impact on carers of patients with head and neck cancer, both in practical terms (economic costs, disruption) and also in psychological terms. Many carers of patients with head and neck cancer described becoming distressed by their commute. Some carers from large urban cities appeared to have hidden commuting burdens. Some carers respond to commuting stress by 'zoning out' or becoming 'like zombies'. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment-related travel for head and neck cancer can have significant practical and psychological impacts. Health professionals should be aware of the impacts that commuting can have on head and neck caregivers. Health services may be able to take practical steps, such as providing subsidized parking, to address head and neck carergivers' difficulties.
PURPOSE: To explore the effect that treatment-related commuting has on carers of patients with head and neck cancer. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews, thematically analysed, with 31 carers. RESULTS: Treatment-related commuting had a considerable impact on carers of patients with head and neck cancer, both in practical terms (economic costs, disruption) and also in psychological terms. Many carers of patients with head and neck cancer described becoming distressed by their commute. Some carers from large urban cities appeared to have hidden commuting burdens. Some carers respond to commuting stress by 'zoning out' or becoming 'like zombies'. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment-related travel for head and neck cancer can have significant practical and psychological impacts. Health professionals should be aware of the impacts that commuting can have on head and neck caregivers. Health services may be able to take practical steps, such as providing subsidized parking, to address head and neck carergivers' difficulties.