Lindsay Hedden1,2,3, Phil Pollock4, Bryan Stirling5,6, Larry Goldenberg4,7, Celestia Higano4,7,8. 1. School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 2206 E Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada. Lindsay.hedden@ubc.ca. 2. Vancouver Prostate Centre, 2660 Oak St, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3Z6, Canada. Lindsay.hedden@ubc.ca. 3. Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, 7th Floor, 828 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada. Lindsay.hedden@ubc.ca. 4. Vancouver Prostate Centre, 2660 Oak St, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3Z6, Canada. 5. School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 2206 E Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada. 6. Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, 7th Floor, 828 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada. 7. Department of Urologic Sciences, University British Columbia, 6th Floor, 2775 Laurel Street, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada. 8. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Centre, University of Washington, 1100 Fairview Ave N, Seattle, WA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine registration rates, and the timing/intensity of follow-up with a prostate cancer supportive care (PCSC) program, and to explore clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with participation and non-participation. METHODS: We used electronic medical records for a cohort of men diagnosed with prostate cancer (PC) who attended a PC-related appointment at the Vancouver Prostate Centre, January 2013-December 2016. We used multivariate logistic regression to quantify the effect of diagnostic treatment and sociodemographic characteristic PCSC program registration and subsequent attendance. We produced Kaplan-Meier estimators to assess the probability of program attendance over the disease trajectory for those who registered. RESULTS: Almost 15% of the men who registered for the program did not end up using any services. An additional 23% attended only one session/clinical appointment. Surgical and radiation treatments increased the odds and intensity of participation. Long travel distance decreased the odds of registering and participating. Low income decreased the odds of registration but not subsequent participation. CONCLUSIONS: While the use of supportive care services can help address the detrimental effects of prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment, one in six men who register for supportive care do not end up using any. Offering these services at no cost and alongside treatment appears to be insufficient to ensuring access for all patients. Additional research is needed to understand barriers and facilitators of accessing supportive care in this population.
PURPOSE: To examine registration rates, and the timing/intensity of follow-up with a prostate cancer supportive care (PCSC) program, and to explore clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with participation and non-participation. METHODS: We used electronic medical records for a cohort of men diagnosed with prostate cancer (PC) who attended a PC-related appointment at the Vancouver Prostate Centre, January 2013-December 2016. We used multivariate logistic regression to quantify the effect of diagnostic treatment and sociodemographic characteristic PCSC program registration and subsequent attendance. We produced Kaplan-Meier estimators to assess the probability of program attendance over the disease trajectory for those who registered. RESULTS: Almost 15% of the men who registered for the program did not end up using any services. An additional 23% attended only one session/clinical appointment. Surgical and radiation treatments increased the odds and intensity of participation. Long travel distance decreased the odds of registering and participating. Low income decreased the odds of registration but not subsequent participation. CONCLUSIONS: While the use of supportive care services can help address the detrimental effects of prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment, one in six men who register for supportive care do not end up using any. Offering these services at no cost and alongside treatment appears to be insufficient to ensuring access for all patients. Additional research is needed to understand barriers and facilitators of accessing supportive care in this population.
Entities:
Keywords:
Prostate cancer; Supportive care; Survivor; Survivorship care
Authors: Kathryn L Taylor; George Luta; Anthony B Miller; Timothy R Church; Scott P Kelly; Larry R Muenz; Kimberly M Davis; David L Dawson; Sara Edmond; Douglas Reding; Jerome E Mabie; Thomas L Riley Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-06-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Robert K Nam; Patrick Cheung; Sender Herschorn; Refik Saskin; Jiandong Su; Laurence H Klotz; Michelle Chang; Girish S Kulkarni; Yuna Lee; Ronald T Kodama; Steven A Narod Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Philip Cornford; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Erik Briers; Maria De Santis; Tobias Gross; Ann M Henry; Steven Joniau; Thomas B Lam; Malcolm D Mason; Henk G van der Poel; Theo H van der Kwast; Olivier Rouvière; Thomas Wiegel; Nicolas Mottet Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: James D Harrison; Jane M Young; Melanie A Price; Phyllis N Butow; Michael J Solomon Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Ted A Skolarus; Andrew M D Wolf; Nicole L Erb; Durado D Brooks; Brian M Rivers; Willie Underwood; Andrew L Salner; Michael J Zelefsky; Jeanny B Aragon-Ching; Susan F Slovin; Daniela A Wittmann; Michael A Hoyt; Victoria J Sinibaldi; Gerald Chodak; Mandi L Pratt-Chapman; Rebecca L Cowens-Alvarado Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: D Santa Mina; C M Sabiston; D Au; A J Fong; L C Capozzi; D Langelier; M Chasen; J Chiarotto; J R Tomasone; J M Jones; E Chang; S N Culos-Reed Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 3.677