Radiotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Mexico: Results from the 2015 National Survey.

BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy is a keystone to improve survival and quality of life in breast cancer patients. In Mexico, however, scarce information is available on the obstacles faced by radio-oncologists to provide appropriate treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine the most frequent issues faced by physicians to provide radiation therapy for metastatic breast cancer in Mexico. METHODS: A survey of 16 multiple-choice questions to be answered electronically by 167 radio-oncologists currently working in Mexico was designed and thereafter analyzed for differences between private and public practices, based on the responses from the surveyed participants. RESULTS: 98.5% of surveyed responders attended patients with breast cancer. We observed a significant difference between private vs. public practice for the main difficulties in providing radiation therapy, with an increased frequency (85.8%) of "treatment cost by itself" in private practice vs. 50.7% in public practice (p < 0.05). Significant differences were observed in the "Time to initiate treatment" question, with "Less than one week" as the response in 86% of those physicians in private practice vs. 50% for those in public practice (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Using a survey targeted at radio-oncologists, we analyzed the most important obstacles for accessing radiation therapy for metastatic breast cancer in Mexico. This information may be useful for healthcare decisions related to radiation therapy in women with breast cancer in Mexico.

Expanding the scope and relevance of health interventions: moving beyond clinical trials and behavior change models.

An overemphasis on clinical trials and behavior change models has narrowed the knowledge base that can be used to design interventions. The overarching point is that the process of overanalyzing variables is impeding the process of gaining insight into the everyday experiences that shape how people define health and seek treatment. This claim is especially important to health decision-making and behavior change because subtle interpretations often influence the decisions that people make. This manuscript provides a critique of traditional approaches to developing health interventions, and theoretically justifies what and why changes are warranted. The limited scope of these models is also discussed, and an argument is made to adopt a strategy that includes the perceptions of people as necessary for understanding health and health-related decision-making. Three practical strategies are suggested to be used with the more standard approaches to assessing the effectiveness and relevance of health interventions.