Cancer‐related help‐seeking in cancer survivors living in regional and remote Australia

Abstract

Objectives To measure rates of detection via screening, perceived self‐imposed delays in seeking medical attention, and support seeking in a sample of regional and remote people with a cancer diagnosis and to test whether an association exists between these behaviours and minimising problems and resignation, a need for self‐control and reliance and fatalism. Correlations and binary logistic regressions were conducted to test the associations between demographic characteristics, attitudes and behaviours. Results Females were more likely to have had their cancer detected via screening (OR = 10.02, CI = 3.49–28.78). Younger participants (r = −0.103, p = 0.009) were slightly more likely to seek at least one form of support and online support was sought more often by younger patients (r = −0.269, p < 0.001), females (r = 0.152, p < 0.001), those from higher socio‐economic (SES) areas (r = 0.100, p = 0.012), and those with higher education levels (r = 0.247, p < 0.001). Younger (r = −0.161, p < 0.001), and female (r = 0.82, p = 0.013), participants were also slightly more likely to seek support specifically through cancer support groups. No significant relationships between minimising problems and resignation, needs for control and self‐reliance or fatalism and detection via screening, support seeking, or perceived self‐imposed delays to seeking medical attention were apparent, with the exception that those with higher fatalism (predetermined health) were slightly less likely to report seeking support or information online (OR = 0.79, CI = 0.65–0.95) and slightly more likely to report using Cancer Council's support services (OR = 1.24, CI = 1.02–1.52). Conclusions Strategies to improve the accessibility and appropriateness of support available for regional and remote cancer patients should consider interventions that remove barriers to access associated with age, gender, and education as opposed to those which address the attitudinal traits measured here.

Information needs and preferences among rural cancer survivors in Queensland, Australia: a qualitative examination

“…The most common sources of information for cancer survivors are healthcare professionals, other cancer survivors and written material 28–30 . This pattern of information preference is to be expected as survivors perceive health professionals to possess the expert knowledge and be most reliable, while peers can give insights into the lived experience of treatment and side effects that cannot be provided by health professionals.…”

“…In addition, cancer survivors’ recall of information can be poor and impacted by cognitive side effects of treatment, which may further impact on their ability to make informed decisions and manage their disease effectively 13 . This may be particularly important in rural areas where there is reduced access to services and supportive care, and extensive travel is required for specialist appointments 14,15 …”

Factors related to help-seeking for cancer medical care among people living in rural areas: a scoping review

“…Rural residents in both countries self-medicated when they became aware of cancer symptoms. [ 24 ] Goodwin et al, 2021 Australia Various cancers To identify awareness of delays when seeking help and factors related to the intention to seek help. Quantitative 648 people residing in regional and rural areas who had been diagnosed with cancer Being dismissive of problems, religion, the need for self-management, and having fatalistic views and attitudes were not associated with undergoing health screening examinations or delayed help-seeking.…”

“… Religion was not a factor in help-seeking [ 24 , 29 ] There was no association between help-seeking and fatalism, self-reliance and symptom appraisal [ 24 ] …”

The Supportive Care Needs of Regional and Remote Cancer Caregivers

“…The cancer patients were staying at subsidised accommodation lodges while receiving their cancer care in a major centre more than 50 km from their home. Details of patient recruitment is detailed elsewhere [19]. Caregivers included spouses/partners, family members, or friends.…”