Co-designing planning interventions to facilitate participation in mail-out bowel cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Population mail-out bowel cancer screening programs save lives through prevention and early detection; however, their effectiveness is constrained by low participation rates. Many non-participants are "intenders"; that is, they intend to screen but fail to do so, often forgetting or procrastinating. This study aimed to co-design interventions to increase screening participation among intenders in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. METHODS: Three semi-structured interviews, and one online cross-sectional survey, were conducted between August 2021 and December 2022. Interviews with people who had completed and returned their latest screening kit ("completers") were first conducted to identify the planning strategies they had used. Using survey data, logistic regressions were conducted to analyse strategies predictive of participants having returned their latest bowel cancer screening kit. Then, intenders were interviewed to explore their opinions of these strategies and worked with researchers to adapt these strategies into prototype interventions to facilitate screening participation. All interviews were analysed using the framework approach of codebook thematic analysis. RESULTS: Interview participants who returned their kit shared their effective planning strategies, such as putting the kit in a visible place or by the toilet, planning a time at home to complete the kit, and using reminders. Survey participants who reported using such strategies were more likely to have completed their screening kit compared to those who did not. Prototype interventions developed and endorsed by intenders included providing a prompt to place the kit or a sticker near the toilet as a reminder, a deadline for kit return, the option to sign up for reminders, and a bag to store the sample in the fridge. CONCLUSIONS: These novel, consumer-led interventions that are built upon the needs and experience of screening invitees provide potential solutions to improve participation in population bowel cancer screening.

Changes in rural caregivers' health behaviors while supporting someone with cancer: A qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Caring for someone with cancer has a significant impact on usual routines, including caregivers' ability to maintain their own health and wellbeing. Caregivers living in rural areas face additional challenges in supporting someone with cancer, and little is known about the impact of caregiving on the health behaviors of rural caregivers. Therefore, this study explored how caring for someone with cancer affected rural caregivers' health behaviors. METHODS: Through semi-structured interviews, 20 rural caregivers described changes in their health behaviors while caring for someone with cancer and the factors underlying these changes. Specific prompts were provided for diet, physical activity, alcohol, smoking, sleep, social connection and leisure, and accessing health care when needed. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was used to identify changes in health behaviors and the factors underlying these changes. The factors identified were mapped to the socioecological framework, identifying areas for intervention across multiple levels (individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy). RESULTS: Rural caregivers reported both positive and negative changes to their diet, physical activity, alcohol, and smoking. Sleep, social connection and leisure, and accessing health care were negatively impacted since becoming a caregiver. CONCLUSIONS: Designing interventions to address rural caregivers' coping strategies, reduce carer burden and fatigue, improve access to cooking and exercise facilities and social support while away from home, reduce the need to travel for treatment, and increase the financial support available could yield widespread benefits for supporting the health and wellbeing of rural caregivers.

The implementation and mechanisms of advance notification for cancer screening: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and synthesise information on the content and delivery of advance notifications (information about cancer screening delivered prior to invitation) used to increase cancer screening participation and to understand the mechanisms that may underlie their effectiveness. METHODS: Searches related to advance notification and cancer screening were conducted in six electronic databases (APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science) and results were screened for eligibility. Study characteristics, features of the advance notifications (cancer type, format, delivery time, and content), and the effect of the notifications on cancer screening participation were extracted. Features were summarised and compared across effective versus ineffective notifications. RESULTS: Thirty-two articles were included in this review, reporting on 33 unique advance notifications. Of these, 79% were sent via postal mail, 79% were distributed prior to bowel cancer screening, and most were sent 2 weeks before the screening offer. Twenty-two full versions of the advance notifications were obtained for content analysis. Notifications included information about cancer risk, the benefits of screening, barriers to participation, social endorsement of cancer screening, and what to expect throughout the screening process. Of the 19 notifications whose effect was tested statistically, 68% were found to increase screening (by 0.7%-16%). Effectiveness did not differ according to the format, delivery time, or content within the notification, although some differences in cancer type were observed. CONCLUSION: Future research should explore the effectiveness of advance notification via alternative formats and for other screening contexts and disentangle the intervention- and person-level factors driving its effect on screening participation.

Decisions and prompts to screen for cervical, bowel, and breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate what makes Australians decide to screen and follow through for breast, cervical, and bowel cancer population screening programs. METHODS: A convenience sample (N = 962) answered open-text questions about their decision to screen and what prompted them to act in an online survey. Open text responses were coded based on shared meaning using content analysis. Frequencies of each code were calculated. RESULTS: For breast and cervical screening, decisions were commonly based on screening being routine (32.58%breast and 35.19%cervical) or receiving a reminder (20.53% breast 13.07% cervical), and similarly, common prompts were receiving a reminder (40.68% breast and 29.13% cervical), screening being routine (22.05% breast and 18.65% cervical). Participants reported deciding to screen for bowel cancer due to arrival of home screening test kit (40.50%) or the experience of loved one's cancer (13.57%) and were prompted by arrival of home test kit (23.58%), and convenience (15.72%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings can inform the development of interventions targeting non-participants of cancer screening programs. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Messages to encourage breast and cervical cancer screening should frame screening as part of regular healthcare routine. Messages to encourage bowel cancer screening should encourage immediate use of the screening kit upon arrival.

Predictors of Psychological Distress among Post-Operative Cardiac Patients: A Narrative Review.

Following surgery, over 50% of cardiac surgery patients report anxiety, stress and/or depression, with at least 10% meeting clinical diagnoses, which can persist for more than a year. Psychological distress predicts post-surgery health outcomes for cardiac patients. Therefore, post-operative distress represents a critical recovery challenge affecting both physical and psychological health. Despite some research identifying key personal, social, and health service correlates of patient distress, a review or synthesis of this evidence remains unavailable. Understanding these factors can facilitate the identification of high-risk patients, develop tailored support resources and interventions to support optimum recovery. This narrative review synthesises evidence from 39 studies that investigate personal, social, and health service predictors of post-surgery psychological distress among cardiac patients. The following factors predicted lower post-operative distress: participation in pre-operative education, cardiac rehabilitation, having a partner, happier marriages, increased physical activity, and greater social interaction. Conversely, increased pain and functional impairment predicted greater distress. The role of age, and sex in predicting distress is inconclusive. Understanding several factors is limited by the inability to carry out experimental manipulations for ethical reasons (e.g., pain). Future research would profit from addressing key methodological limitations and exploring the role of self-efficacy, pre-operative distress, and pre-operative physical activity. It is recommended that cardiac patients be educated pre-surgery and attend cardiac rehabilitation to decrease distress.

The Barriers to Bowel Cancer Screening Scale: Examining Structural Validity, Measurement Invariance, and Criterion Validity.

OBJECTIVE: The success of national cancer screening programs, such as the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) in Australia, depends on public participation, which is currently an alarming 43.5% for the NBCSP. Understanding the barriers that impede screening participation requires valid measurement instruments. This study aims to cross-validate such an instrument with a new, large, and varied sample, as well as assess measurement invariance across subsamples at a greatest risk of nonparticipation (ie, testing whether the scale functions in similar ways across groups). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional sample of 1158 participants from the target screening population (50-74 years) provided demographic information, responses to the Barriers to Home Bowel Screening (BB-CanS) scale, and information on their previous screening participation. RESULTS: Both the full and the brief versions of the BB-CanS scale showed good model fit for the full sample and for gender and age subsamples. Despite the inter-factor correlations being high, the unidimensional and bi-factor models exhibited poorer fit. Improvement in fit was observed with scale refinement involving the removal of 7 items. All versions of the BB-CanS scale were invariant across gender and age subsamples. Age and gender differences emerged across several barriers and variance in all 4 barriers significantly predicted prior screening participation. CONCLUSION: The BB-CanS scale is a valid measure of 4 highly correlated barriers to home bowel cancer screening: disgust relating to screening, avoidance of test outcomes, practical difficulty (or challenges), and the need for a sense of greater autonomy. All versions of the instrument measure the equivalent construct across age and gender groups. Observed differences in barriers across at-risk groups provide targets for future intervention.

Psychological distress and bowel cancer screening participation.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand barriers to participation in mail-out bowel cancer screening programs, two survey studies tested the relationship between psychological distress and self-reported bowel cancer screening. METHODS: First, a nationally representative sample of Australians N = 5421 completed measures of bowel cancer screening and psychological distress (using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale; K10). Second, N = 479 completed a survey measuring participation in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) and psychological distress using the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale. In both studies, logistic regressions were conducted to test relationships between psychological distress and self-reported screening participation. RESULTS: Study one found that psychological distress had a significant quadratic effect on having ever screened for bowel cancer, where screening rates were similar for those with low, moderate, or high levels of distress, but were lower for those with very high levels of distress. In study two, depression scores had a negative linear relationship with NBCSP participation (higher depression levels were associated with lower screening participation), and anxiety had a quadratic effect whereby NBCSP participation rates were higher with increasing levels of anxiety except in the severe category, where participation was significantly lower. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that psychological distress has a complex relationship with screening, and those with extreme levels of distress consistently show lower participation rates. Special efforts to encourage screening may be required for those experiencing extreme psychological distress and mental health disorders.

The role of need for control and self-reliance in gender and age differences in bowel cancer screening participation.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationships between need for control and self-reliance and barriers to bowel cancer screening to better understand the reasons for lower bowel cancer screening adherence in males and younger individuals. METHODS: Participants (n = 506) aged between 54 and 75 years old completed an online survey measuring demographic information, the four-factor Barriers to Home Bowel Cancer Screening Scale (BB-CanS) and a measure of Need for Control and Self-Reliance (NCSR). Model fit statistics were compared for seven path models testing the relationships between NCSR and BB-CanS factors and the moderating and mediating effects of age and gender. RESULTS: Models where age and gender were included as moderators showed the best fit. When compared to females and those under 60 years of age, stronger positive associations between NCSR and BB-CanS factors were evident among males (ßavoidance  = 0.539, p < 0.001); ßdisgust  = 0.558, p < 0.001; ßdifficulty  = 0.489, p < 0.001; ßautonomy  = 0.619, p = 0.002) and those over 60 years of age (ßavoidance  = 0.400, p < 0.001); ßdisgust  = 0.462, p < 0.001; ßdifficulty  = 0.447, p < 0.001; ßautonomy  = 0.378, p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: When encouraging males and people aged 60 years and over to participate in bowel cancer screening, public health messages may benefit from conveying preventative health behaviour and cancer screening participation as actions that reflect self-control and self-reliance.

Identifying modifiable features of home bowel cancer screening kits to facilitate use: consumer perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the widely publicised health benefits of participation in bowel cancer screening, only 43.5% of recipients participate in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP). Through consultation with kit recipients, this study aimed to identify features of home bowel screening kits that could be modified to increase their use. METHOD: Participants (n = 25) were presented with nine different bowel cancer screening kits and asked to identify features of each kit that might prevent or promote their use. Responses were coded using content analysis, and a narrative synthesis is presented summarising preferences relating to each element of the kit. RESULTS: Six modifiable elements were identified: collection tool, collection sheet, specimen container, instruction, packaging and processes. Participant preferences were for collection devices that limited the users' proximity to faecal matter, smaller packaging, simpler processes and step-by-step pictorial instructions. Responses regarding aesthetics, the amount of information included and receiving immediate results were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide several consumer-driven recommendations, which are to be tested in future research aimed at improving the acceptability and usability of kits distributed in population bowel cancer screening programs.

Barriers to home bowel cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and test a psychometric instrument for measuring common barriers to completing and returning home bowel cancer screening kits. METHODS: One hundred and ten items were reviewed by an expert panel (n = 15) and presented in an online cross-sectional survey with 427 Australian adults. Exploratory factor analysis was used to identify an optimal factor solution of latent barrier types and aggregated factor scores were examined and compared between demographic groups. RESULTS: Common barriers included having already been screened (32.3%), forgetting about the kit (24.4%), and a lack of planning (21.8%). Barriers reflecting hygiene concerns were also endorsed by over 15% of the sample. Four clear barrier types were evident reflecting disgust, avoidance, lack of autonomy, and physical difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support calls to apply multi-faceted interventions strategies that address a broad range of barrier types, particularly that which encourage planning, and prompt and facilitate easy stool collection.

The role of masculinities in psychological and emotional help seeking by men with prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of demographic characteristics and masculinities on seeking support for psychosocial care needs in men with prostate cancer. METHODS: Prostate cancer survivors (n = 225) completed mail-out surveys measuring psychological care needs, masculinities, and psychological and emotional help-seeking intention and behaviour at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Older age was associated with seeking help from a general practitioner (GP), χ2 (1,225) = 4.72, P = .03, and being born overseas was associated with seeking peer support (1,225) = 7.13, P = .01. Men with higher levels of optimistic action who reported moderate to high unmet psychological need were less likely to seek help for psychological and emotional concerns at 6- (odds ratio [OR] = 0.06, confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.46) and 12-month (OR = 0.13, CI, 0.26-0.65) follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS: Optimistic action may explain why some men with prostate cancer fail to seek help for their psychological care needs. Clinicians should be aware that men with chronic illness who appear to approach challenges with optimistic action may in fact be less likely to seek psychological help when needed.

General practitioner endorsement of mail-out colorectal cancer screening: The perspective of nonparticipants.

Despite the health and economic benefits associated with mail-out colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, participation in programs across the world is suboptimal. A letter from the recipient's general practitioner (GP) endorsing program participation has been shown to have a consistent, but modest, effect on screening uptake; however, the mechanisms by which GP endorsement is effective have not been investigated. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the potential utility of GP endorsement letters or SMS in the context of facilitating bowel cancer screening in previous nonparticipants and to identify mechanisms underlying responses. A cross-section of nonparticipants in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (N = 110) was randomly assigned to view a letter or SMS from a GP endorsing participation via an online survey. Ordinal responses reflecting effectiveness of, and influences on, GP endorsement were collected along with open questions regarding other potential endorsers. Percentages, means, and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and compared. Fifty-two percent of the sample agreed that GP endorsement would encourage their future participation. Responses did not differ between SMS and letter formats. Trust in the GP had significantly more influence on response to GP endorsement than the credibility or medical knowledge. Other health professionals and cancer survivors were commonly suggested as alternative sources of endorsement. Interventions to improve CRC screening participation could benefit from the routine implementation of GP endorsement from GPs, other trusted health professionals, or cancer survivors, particularly by encouraging people who forget or procrastinate over collecting a stool sample.

Strategies for increasing participation in mail-out colorectal cancer screening programs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Population mail-out bowel screening programs are a convenient, cost-effective and sensitive method of detecting colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite the increased survival rates associated with early detection of CRC, in many countries, 50% or more of eligible individuals do not participate in such programs. The current study systematically reviews interventions applied to increase fecal occult blood test (FOBT) kit return, specifically in population mail-out programs. METHODS: Five electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses) were searched for articles published before the 10th of March 2018. Studies were included if they reported the results of an intervention designed to increase the return rate of FOBT kits that had been mailed to individuals' homes. PRISMA systematic review reporting methods were applied and each study was assessed using Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool. Pooled effect sizes were calculated for each intervention type and the risk of bias was tested as a moderator for sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The review identified 53 interventions from 30 published studies from which nine distinct intervention strategy types emerged. Sensitivity analysis showed that the risk of bias marginally moderated the overall effect size. Pooled risk ratios and confidence intervals for each intervention type revealed that telephone contact RR = 1.23, 95% CI (1.08-1.40), GP endorsement RR = 1.19, 95% CI (1.10-1.29), simplified test procedures RR = 1.17, 95% CI (1.09-1.25), and advance notifications RR = 1.09, 95% CI (1.07-1.11) were effective intervention strategies with small to moderate effect sizes. Studies with a high risk of bias were removed and pooled effects remained relatively unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that combine program-level changes incorporating the issue of advance notification and alternative screening tools with the involvement of primary health professionals through endorsement letters and telephone contact should lead to increases in kit return in mail-out CRC screening programs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review is registered with PROSPERO; registration number CRD42017064652.

Geographic variations in stage at diagnosis and survival for colorectal cancer in Australia: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Australia has one of the highest incidence rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the world. Residents in rural areas of Australia experience disadvantage in health care and outcomes. This review investigates whether patients with CRC in rural areas demonstrate poorer survival and more advanced stages of disease at diagnosis. METHODS: Systematic review of peer-reviewed articles and grey literature. Studies were included if they provided data on survival or stage of disease at diagnosis across multiple geographical locations; focused on CRC patients; and were conducted in Australia. RESULTS: Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria. Twenty-three studies examined survival, while five studies investigated stage at diagnosis. The evidence suggests that non-metropolitan patients are less likely to survive CRC for five years compared to patients living in metropolitan areas, yet there was limited evidence to suggest geographical disparity in stage of diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: While five-year survival disparities are apparent, these patterns appear to vary as a function of specific region and health jurisdiction, cancer type and year/s of data collection. Future research should examine current data using consistent and robust methods of reporting survival and classifying geographical location. The impact of population-level screening programmes on survival and stage at diagnosis also needs to be thoroughly explored.

Geographic Disparities in Previously Diagnosed Health Conditions in Colorectal Cancer Patients Are Largely Explained by Age and Area Level Disadvantage.

Background: Geographical disparity in colorectal cancer (CRC) survival rates may be partly due to aging populations and disadvantage in more remote locations; factors that also impact the incidence and outcomes of other chronic health conditions. The current study investigates whether geographic disparity exists amongst previously diagnosed health conditions in CRC patients above and beyond age and area-level disadvantage and whether this disparity is linked to geographic disparity in CRC survival. Methods: Data regarding previously diagnosed health conditions were collected via computer-assisted telephone interviews with a cross-sectional sample of n = 1,966 Australian CRC patients between 2003 and 2004. Ten-year survival outcomes were acquired in December 2014 from cancer registry data. Multivariate logistic regressions were applied to test associations between previously diagnosed health conditions and survival rates in rural, regional, and metropolitan areas. Results: Results suggest that only few geographical disparities exist in previously diagnosed health conditions for CRC patients and these were largely explained by socio-economic status and age. Living in an inner regional area was associated with cardio-vascular conditions, one or more respiratory diseases, and multiple respiratory diagnoses. Higher occurrences of these conditions did not explain lower CRC-specific 10 years survival rates in inner regional Australia. Conclusion: It is unlikely that health disparities in terms of previously diagnosed conditions account for poorer CRC survival in regional and remote areas. Interventions to improve the health of regional CRC patients may need to target issues unique to socio-economic disadvantage and older age.

Geographical Variations in the Clinical Management of Colorectal Cancer in Australia: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: In Australia, cancer survival is significantly lower in non-metropolitan compared to metropolitan areas. Our objective was to evaluate the evidence on geographical variations in the clinical management and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: A systematic review of published and gray literature was conducted. Five databases (CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, ProQuest, and Informit) were searched for articles published in English from 1990 to 2018. Studies were included if they assessed differences in clinical management according to geographical location; focused on CRC patients; and were conducted in Australia. Included studies were critically appraised using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. PRISMA systematic review reporting methods were applied. RESULTS: 17 articles met inclusion criteria. All were of high (53%) or moderate (47%) quality. The evidence available may suggest that patients in non-metropolitan areas are more likely to experience delays in surgery and are less likely to receive chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer and adjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: The present review found limited information on clinical management across geographic regions in Australia and the synthesis highlights significant issues both for data collection and reporting at the population level, and for future research in the area of geographic variation. Where geographical disparities exist, these may be due to a combination of patient and system factors reflective of location. It is recommended that population-level data regarding clinical management of CRC be routinely collected to better understand geographical variations and inform future guidelines and policy.

Cancer care in regional Australia from the health professional's perspective.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to identify the factors which health professionals believe influence clinical care and outcomes for people with cancer in regional areas of Australia. METHODS: Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with a variety of health professionals. Interview questions explored health professional's perspectives on barriers to cancer care for patients, factors which influence clinical care, and access to support in regional areas. Data were interpreted using an inductive thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Two global themes were identified: rural culture and the health system. Within these global themes, health professionals discussed barriers to cancer care in regional areas, predominantly associated with travel, limited workforce, and poor communication within the health system. Participants also noted many positive aspects of cancer care in regional areas, including more personalised care for the patients and faster career progression for professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Despite several strategies to improve rural cancer care in recent times, including innovative models of care and increased infrastructure, health professionals still perceive many barriers to cancer care in regional Australia. These are predominantly associated with patient demographics, travel difficulties, and inadequate governance. However, there are also many notable benefits to receiving care in regional areas which have been absent from previous literature. These positive factors should be incorporated in efforts to enhance regional cancer care through the recruitment of health professionals to regional areas and development of regional community support networks.

Socio-demographic factors drive regional differences in participation in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program - An ecological analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine if geographic variations in the participation rates in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) are related to population-level socio-demographic characteristics. METHODS: Data reflecting participation in the NBCSP for 504 Local Government Areas (LGAs) between July 2011 and June 2013 were extracted from the Social Health Atlas of Australia. Logistic regression models were used to examine independent associations (odds ratios [ORs]) between participation, Remoteness Area (RA) and selected socio-demographic variables. RESULTS: Compared to the participation rate for major cities (33.4%), participation was significantly higher in inner regional areas (36.5%, OR=1.15), but was much lower in remote (27.9%, OR=0.77) or very remote areas (25.0%, OR=0.65). When controlling for study period, gender, proportion of persons aged 65 years and older, Indigenous status, cultural background and socioeconomic status, significantly higher rates were observed in all non-metropolitan areas than in major cities. Indigenous status was strongly related to the poorer participation in remote areas. CONCLUSIONS: Socio-demographic characteristics, particularly Indigenous status, cultural background and population ageing, seem to be more important drivers of regional disparities in NBCSP participation than geographic remoteness. Implications for public health: This study provides important evidence to understand the regional disparities in participating in the national screening program.

A systematic review of geographical differences in management and outcomes for colorectal cancer in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Australia and New Zealand have the highest incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the world, presenting considerable health, economic, and societal burden. Over a third of the Australian population live in regional areas and research has shown they experience a range of health disadvantages that result in a higher disease burden and lower life expectancy. The extent to which geographical disparities exist in CRC management and outcomes has not been systematically explored. The present review aims to identify the nature of geographical disparities in CRC survival, clinical management, and psychosocial outcomes. METHODS: The review followed PRISMA guidelines and searches were undertaken using seven databases covering articles between 1 January 1990 and 20 April 2016 in an Australian setting. Inclusion criteria stipulated studies had to be peer-reviewed, in English, reporting data from Australia on CRC patients and relevant to one of fourteen questions examining geographical variations in a) survival outcomes, b) patient and cancer characteristics, c) diagnostic and treatment characteristics and d) psychosocial and quality of life outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-eight quantitative, two qualitative, and three mixed-methods studies met review criteria. Twenty-seven studies were of high quality, sixteen studies were of moderate quality, and no studies were found to be low quality. Individuals with CRC living in regional, rural, and remote areas of Australia showed poorer survival and experienced less optimal clinical management. However, this effect is likely moderated by a range of other factors (e.g., SES, age, gender) and did appear to vary linearly with increasing distance from metropolitan centres. No studies examined differences in use of stoma, or support with stomas, by geographic location. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, despite evidence of disparity in CRC survival and clinical management across geographic locations, the evidence was limited and at times inconsistent. Further, access to treatment and services may not be the main driver of disparities, with individual patient characteristics and type of region also playing an important role. A better understanding of factors driving ongoing and significant geographical disparities in cancer related outcomes is required to inform the development of effective interventions to improve the health and welfare of regional Australians.