Post-surgery financial toxicity and its influencing factors in colorectal cancer care: A cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the influence factors of financial toxicity experienced by colorectal cancer patients after surgery. The results will provide deep insights for developing effective intervention strategies to address this common issue of colorectal cancer care. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 213 postoperative patients with colorectal cancer from February 2023 to July 2023 in two major public hospitals. Patients completed the General Information Questionnaire, Comprehensive Scores for Financial Toxicity (COST), Self-perceived Burden Scale (SPBS), Family Resilience Questionnaire (FaREQ), and Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS). A multiple linear regression model was used to investigate the influence factors of financial toxicity. RESULTS: The mean score of financial toxicity was medium (18.91 ± 7.90) in this study. Financial toxicity score was negatively correlated with self-perceived burden (r = -0.333, P < 0.01) and positively associated with family resilience (r = 0.365, P < 0.01) and social support (r = 0.388, P < 0.01). Via multiple linear regression analysis, we identified seven significant factors associated with financial toxicity, including family income [(95 %CI: 1.075-3.123); P = 0.000], self-perceived burden [(95 %CI: 0.300∼-0.038); P = 0.012], stoma [(95 %CI: 5.309∼-1.682); P = 0.000], social support [(95 %CI:0.058-0.407); P = 0.009], cancer stage [(95 %CI: 2.178∼-0.170); P = 0.022], postoperative duration [(95 %CI: 1.900∼-0.332); P = 0.005], and family resilience [(95 %CI: 0.028-0.203); P = 0.010]. CONCLUSIONS: Financial toxicity was prevalent among postoperative colorectal cancer patients. Additional support and early interventions should be given to high-risk patients, including those with stomas, advanced disease stages, or experiencing longer postoperative duration. Apart from demographic factors, we identified that self-perceived burden, family resilience, and social support were also associated with financial toxicity, providing a new perspective for developing effective strategies against financial toxicity.

Caregiver burden, mutuality, and family resilience in colorectal cancer caring: A mediating model analysis.

PURPOSE: This study investigates the interaction between caregiver burden, mutuality, and family resilience in colorectal cancer management, and determines whether mutuality affects the effect of caregiver burden on family resilience. METHOD: In this cross-sectional study, 295 family caregivers of colorectal cancer patients from two major public hospitals (Henan Province, China) were analyzed. Caregiver burden, mutuality, and family resilience were assessed through Chinese versions of the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI-C), the mutuality Scale (MS-C), and the Family Resilience Questionnaire (FaREQ-C). The structural equation model and multiple mediating effect test were applied to explore the interaction between caregiver burden, mutuality, and family resilience. RESULTS: Total and subscale scores of caregiver burden were negatively correlated with both mutuality (r = -0.54 to -0.32, P < 0.01) and family resilience (r = -0.60 to -0.26, P < 0.01). Family resilience and its four dimensions were positively correlated with mutuality (r = 0.17 to 0.51, P < 0.01). Mutuality served as a partial mediator between caregiver burden and family resilience. Caregiver burden had an indirect effect on family resilience through mutuality (ß = -0.157, 95%CI: -0.316, -0.046, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: This study examined the interaction between caregiver burden, mutuality, and family resilience for colorectal cancer caring and confirmed the mediating role of mutuality in caregiver burden and family resilience. Therefore, we suggested that clinicians should develop strategies to improve the relationship between patients and caregivers so that both parties can actively manage stress and trauma experiences for improved colorectal cancer management.