Turning a Curve: How People Use Everyday Resources to Negotiate Recovery From Cancer Treatment With Curative Intent.

Many more cancers are treated with intent to cure now than in previous decades, but for most, this involves significant effects from which people need to recover psychologically and socially, as well as physically. This longitudinal photo-elicitation interview study uses grounded theory to explain how people discharged from specialist care made use of everyday social and material resources to manage this process at home. Recovery is presented as a curve in life's pathway requiring gradual reorientation, drawing on social worlds and domestic resources to calibrate this process. Findings are described in three stages: (1) responding to diagnosis and treatment, (2) using social resources for meaning-making, and (3) developing assets for recovery. During treatment, participants drew on past identities to reinforce their sense of self, and personalized health care communication supported this process. In the weeks after treatment, new frameworks of understanding were constructed from perspectives on cancer encountered in the family, workplace, and outpatient clinics. Recovery processes included the negotiation of personal change, the renegotiation of close relationships, and the use of everyday resources to regain three sensations: control, comfort, and continuity. Supportive care would benefit from an individualized exploration of the assets that can help people to negotiate this challenging phase as treatment comes to a close. Possibilities for self-care (the maintenance of health and well-being in the context of everyday life) can be explored and assessed through personalized discussion around the identities, social worlds, and everyday resources available to each individual.

A qualitative exploration of women's perspectives and acceptability of including new cancer awareness information in all-clear breast or cervical screening results.

OBJECTIVE: This study explored women's perspectives on the acceptability of including new cancer information with an all-clear breast or cervical screening result letter (using ovarian cancer as a case study). METHODS: In 2016, six focus group discussions were conducted with women aged 25-70 years old, eligible for invitation to the NHS breast or cervical screening programme and resident in England. The focus groups lasted 60-90 min and were held in community venues. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-eight women aged 25-67 years old participated in the focus groups. Data analysis yielded six descriptive themes: general cancer awareness, taking advantage of a 'teachable moment', a double-edge sword, barriers to accepting and using new cancer information, motivators for accepting and using new cancer information and wider strategies to increase cancer awareness in women. Women welcomed the inclusion of new cancer information in all-clear screening results but highlighted pertinent lessons to be considered to maximise the usefulness of the approach. CONCLUSION: While women perceived this approach as acceptable, it is pertinent to note the potential of the new cancer information to stimulate anxiety and potentially widen inequalities by excluding non-attenders at screening programmes. Specific complementary and tailored approaches are necessary to mitigate these limitations.

Translating qualitative data into intervention content using the Theoretical Domains Framework and stakeholder co-design: a worked example from a study of cervical screening attendance in older women.

BACKGROUND: Previous screening interventions have demonstrated a series of features related to social determinants which have increased uptake in targeted populations, including the assessment of health beliefs and barriers to screening attendance as part of intervention development. Many studies cite the use of theory to identify methods of behaviour change, but fail to describe in detail how theoretical constructs are transformed into intervention content. The aim of this study was to use data from a qualitative exploration of cervical screening in women over 50 in the UK as the basis of intervention co-design with stakeholders using behavioural change frameworks. We describe the identification of behavioural mechanisms from qualitative data, and how these were used to develop content for a service-user leaflet and a video animation for practitioner training. The interventions aimed to encourage sustained commitment to cervical screening among women over 50, and to increase sensitivity to age-related problems in screening among primary care practitioners. METHODS: Secondary coding of a qualitative data set to extract barriers and facilitators of cervical screening attendance. Barrier and facilitator statements were categorised using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify relevant behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Key TDF domains and associated BCTs were presented in stakeholder focus groups to guide the design of intervention content and mode of delivery. RESULTS: Behavioural determinants relating to attendance clustered under three domains: beliefs about consequences, emotion and social influences, which mapped to three BCTs respectively: (1) persuasive communication/information provision; (2) stress management; (3) role modelling and encouragement. Service-user stakeholders translated these into three pragmatic intervention components: (i) addressing unanswered questions, (ii) problem-solving practitioner challenges and (iii) peer group communication. Based on (ii), practitioner stakeholders developed a call to action in three areas - clinical networking, history-taking, and flexibility in screening processes. APEASE informed modes of delivery (a service-user leaflet and a cartoon animation for practitioners). CONCLUSION: The application of the TDF to qualitative data can provide an auditable protocol for the translation of qualitative data into intervention content.

Lung cancer symptom appraisal among people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of lung cancer is four times higher in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared with the general population. Promotion of a shorter time from symptom onset to presentation is one potential strategy for earlier lung cancer diagnosis, but distinguishing respiratory symptoms can be difficult. We investigated how the experience of COPD influences symptom appraisal and help seeking for potential lung cancer symptoms. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with men (n = 17) and women (n = 23) aged 40 to 83 years with COPD. Topic guides drew on the integrated symptom-response framework and covered symptom experience, interpretation, action, recognition, help seeking, evaluation, and reevaluation. We used the framework method to analyse the data. RESULTS: Participants said that they attributed chest symptoms to their COPD; no other cause was considered. Participants said that family/friends noticed changes in their symptoms and encouraged help seeking. Others felt isolated by their COPD because they could not get out, were fatigued, or were embarrassed. Participants visited health professionals frequently, but increased risk of lung cancer was not discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides insight into different levels of influence on symptom appraisal and targets for intervention. Greater awareness of increased lung cancer risk and support to act on symptom changes is essential and could be achieved through a concerted information campaign. Health professionals working with people with COPD could also optimise appointments to support symptom appraisal of potential lung cancer symptoms.

Rapid review of factors associated with flexible sigmoidoscopy screening use.

Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening has been shown to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality among screened adults. The aim of this review was to identify patient-related factors associated with the screening test's use. We searched PubMed for studies that examined the association between FS screening use and one or more factors. To determine the eligibility of studies, we first reviewed titles, then abstracts, and finally the full paper. We started with a narrow search, which we expanded successively (by adding 'OR' terms) until the number of new publications eligible after abstract review was <1% of the total number of publications. We then abstracted factors from eligible papers and reported the number of times each was found to be positively or negatively associated with FS screening use. We identified 42 papers, most of which reported studies conducted in the United States of America (n = 21, 50%) and the United Kingdom (n = 13, 31%). Across studies, a wide range of factors were examined (n = 123), almost half of which were found to be associated with FS screening use at least once (n = 60). Sociodemographic and health and lifestyle factors that were frequently positively associated with FS screening use included: male gender, higher socioeconomic status and a family history of CRC. Frequently positively associated psychosocial factors included low perceived barriers and high perceived benefits. Findings suggest that future research should focus on developing a theoretical framework of cancer screening behaviour to allow a greater level of consistency and specificity in measuring key constructs.

Identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people with dementia: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Older people with dementia are at risk of adverse events associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing. AIM: to describe (1) how international tools designed to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing have been used in studies of older people with dementia, (2) the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in this cohort and (3) advantages/disadvantages of tools METHODS: Systematic literature review, designed and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, the Social Science Citation Index, OpenGrey, Base, GreyLit, Mednar and the National Database of Ageing Research were searched in April 2016 for studies describing the use of a tool or criteria to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people with dementia. RESULTS: Three thousand three hundred twenty-six unique papers were identified; 26 were included in the review. Eight studies used more than one tool to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing. There were variations in how the tools were applied. The Beers criteria were the most commonly used tool. Thirteen of the 15 studies using the Beers criteria did not use the full tool. The prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing ranged from 14 to 74% in older people with dementia. Benzodiazepines, hypnotics and anticholinergics were the most common potentially inappropriately prescribed medications. CONCLUSIONS: Variations in tool application may at least in part explain variations in potentially inappropriate prescribing across studies. Recommendations include a more standardised tool usage and ensuring the tools are comprehensive enough to identify all potentially inappropriate medications and are kept up to date.

Emergency admissions and subsequent inpatient care through an emergency oncology service at a tertiary cancer centre: service users' experiences and views.

PURPOSE: Avoiding unnecessary emergency admissions and managing those that are admitted more effectively is a major concern for both patients and health services. To generate evidence useful for improving services for direct patient benefit, this study explores service users' views and experiences of emergency admissions and subsequent inpatient care. METHODS: Participants were recruited during a cancer-related emergency admission from a tertiary cancer centre with an emergency oncology service and emergency department. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 patients and 12 carers post hospital discharge. Interview transcripts were analyzed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Twenty patients experienced 43 emergency admissions over 6 months. Most admissions (35/43) followed patients presenting acutely or as emergencies with cancer treatment side effects. Most admissions (35/43) were directly to an oncology ward following specialist advice, review and triage, and thus unavoidable. Participants experienced outstanding inpatient care because of the following: prompt and effective symptom control and stabilization of acute conditions; continuity of cancer care and coordination between acute and long-term treatment; satisfactory professional-patient communication and information sharing; responsive, motivated and competent staff; and less restrictive visiting times. Gaps in care were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Many emergency admissions are necessary for people with cancer. Future work should focus on improving easy access to specialist advice and triage, and the process of admission; providing rapid palliation of symptoms and prompt stabilization of acute conditions, and satisfactory inpatient care; closing the circle of care for patients by actively involving primary care and palliative/end-of-life care services to address the complex needs of patients and carers.

Interventions to improve the uptake of cervical cancer screening among lower socioeconomic groups: A systematic review.

Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in women worldwide. Screening can reduce both the incidence and mortality of the disease but is often not utilized by lower socioeconomic groups. A systematic review, including studies of interventions to improve breast and cervical cancer screening uptake, up to 2006, found targeted interventions could be effective. A formal update has been conducted on the effectiveness of interventions to improve the uptake of cervical cancer screening among lower socioeconomic groups. A systematic computerized literature search was undertaken in June 2016 for relevant papers published since 2006. Data was extracted on study participants, setting, intervention and control using a predefined extraction tool and a full quality assessment was undertaken using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. This update yielded 16 studies of mixed quality, in addition to the 13 studies from the original review. The interventions were categorized into local interventions including HPV self-testing, lay health advisors, inreach, outreach and mixed, and strategies enhancing attendance within an organized program. This review has found two large, randomized controlled trials for the use of HPV self-testing to increase cervical screening uptake. Both reviews have found varying success using lay health advisors, with the majority of included papers reporting a statistically significant increase in screening uptake. HPV self-testing can improve uptake of cervical cancer screening among lower socioeconomic groups. This is a relatively new method of cervical screening that was not included in the earlier review. The findings of this updated review largely support that of the 2006 review for the use of lay health advisors.

The complex relationship between household income of family caregivers, access to palliative care services and place of death: A national household population survey.

BACKGROUND: Previous work shows that more affluent patients with cancer are more likely to die at home, whereas those dying from non-cancer conditions are more likely to die in hospital. Family caregivers are an important factor in determining place of death. AIM: To investigate associations between family caregivers' household income, patients' access to specialist palliative care and place of patients' death, by level of personal end-of-life care. DESIGN: A cross-sectional community household population survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Respondents to the Household Survey for England. RESULTS: One-third of 1265 bereaved respondents had provided personal end-of-life care (caregivers) (30%). Just over half (55%) of decedents accessed palliative care services and 15% died in a hospice. Place of death and access to palliative care were strongly related ( p < 0.001). Palliative care services reduced the proportion of deaths in hospital ( p < 0.001), and decedents accessing palliative care were more likely to die at home than those who did not ( p < 0.001). Respondents' income was not associated with palliative care access ( p = 0.233). Overall, respondents' income and home death were not related ( p = 0.106), but decedents with caregivers in the highest income group were least likely to die at home ( p = 0.069). CONCLUSION: For people who had someone close to them die, decedents' access to palliative care services was associated with fewer deaths in hospital and more home deaths. Respondents' income was unrelated to care recipients' place of death when adjusted for palliative care access. When only caregivers were considered, decedents with caregivers from higher income quartiles were the least likely to die at home. Family caregivers from higher income brackets are likely to be powerful patient advocates. Caregiver information needs must be addressed especially with regard to stage of disease, aim of care and appropriate interventions at the end of life.

Mass media and risk factors for cancer: the under-representation of age.

BACKGROUND: Increasing age is a risk factor for developing cancer. Yet, older people commonly underestimate this risk, are less likely to be aware of the early symptoms, and are more likely to be diagnosed with advanced stage cancer. Mass media are a key influence on the public's understanding health issues, including cancer risk. This study investigates how news media have represented age and other risk factors in the most common cancers over time. METHODS: Eight hundred articles about the four most common cancers (breast, prostate, lung and colorectal) published within eight UK national newspapers in 2003, 2004, 2013 and 2014 were identified using the Nexis database. Relevant manifest content of articles was coded quantitatively and subjected to descriptive statistical analysis in SPSS to identify patterns across the data. RESULTS: Risk was presented in half of the articles but this was rarely discussed in any depth and around a quarter of all articles introduced more than one risk factor, irrespective of cancer site. Age was mentioned as a risk factor in approximately 12% of all articles and this varied by cancer site. Age was most frequently reported in relation to prostate cancer and least often in articles about lung cancer. Articles featuring personal narratives more frequently focused on younger people and this was more pronounced in non-celebrity stories; only 15% of non-celebrity narratives were about people over 60. Other common risks discussed were family history and genetics, smoking, diet, alcohol, and environmental factors. Family history and genetics together featured as the most common risk factors. Risk factor reporting varied by site and family history was most commonly associated with breast cancer, diet with bowel cancer and smoking with lung cancer. CONCLUSION: Age and older adults were largely obscured in media representation of cancer and cancer experience. Indeed common risk factors in general were rarely discussed in any depth. Our findings will usefully inform the development of future cancer awareness campaigns and media guidelines. It is important that older adults appreciate their heightened risk, particularly in the context of help-seeking decisions.

The diagnostic test accuracy of rectal examination for prostate cancer diagnosis in symptomatic patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in the UK. NICE guidelines on recognition and referral of suspected cancer, recommend performing digital rectal examination (DRE) on patients with urinary symptoms and urgently referring if the prostate feels malignant. However, this is based on the results of one case control study, so it is not known if DRE performed in primary care is an accurate method of detecting prostate cancer. METHODS: The aim of this review is to ascertain the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of DRE for the detection of prostate cancer in symptomatic patients in primary care. CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases were searched in august 2015 for studies in which a DRE was performed in primary care on symptomatic patients and compared against a reference diagnostic procedure. RESULTS: Four studies were included with a total of 3225 patients. The sensitivity and specificity for DRE as a predictor of prostate cancer in symptomatic patients was 28.6 and 90.7%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 42.3 and 84.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This review found that DRE performed in general practice is accurate, and supports the UK NICE guidelines that patients with a malignant prostate on examination are referred urgently for suspected prostate cancer. Abnormal DRE carried a 42.3% chance of malignancy, above the 3% risk threshold which NICE guidance suggests warrants an urgent referral. However this review questions the benefit of performing a DRE in primary care in the first instance, suggesting that a patient's risk of prostate cancer based on symptoms alone would warrant urgent referral even if the DRE feels normal.

Multiple myeloma: routes to diagnosis, clinical characteristics and survival - findings from a UK population-based study.

Prompt cancer diagnosis may align UK survival with European averages. We examined the impact of route to diagnosis on survival for multiple myeloma patients diagnosed 2012-2013 using data from our population-based patient cohort that links to national death notifications and collects details on treatment and response (n = 441). Emergency presentation was associated with advanced disease and poorer outcomes, and was the commonest route to diagnosis (28·1%) followed by General Practitioner urgent (19·0%) and two-week wait (17·2%) referrals. CRAB (elevated Calcium, Renal failure, Anaemia, Bone lesions) distribution varied by route (P < 0·001), with patients with emergency presentations most likely to have ≥2 features and significantly worse survival (log-rank test χ2  = 13·8, P = 0·0002).

Does the use of specialist palliative care services modify the effect of socioeconomic status on place of death? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients in lower socioeconomic groups are significantly less likely to die at home and experience more barriers to access to palliative care. It is unclear whether receiving palliative care may mediate the effect of socioeconomic status on place of death. AIM: This review examines whether and how use of specialist palliative care may modify the effect of socioeconomic status on place of death. DESIGN: A systematic review was conducted. Eligible papers were selected and the quality appraised by two independent reviewers. Data were synthesised using a narrative approach. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Knowledge were searched (1997-2013). Bibliographies were scanned and experts contacted. Papers were included if they reported the effect of both socioeconomic status and use of specialist palliative care on place of death for adult cancer patients. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. All study subjects had received specialist palliative care. With regard to place of death, socioeconomic status was found to have (1) no effect in seven studies and (2) an effect in one study. Furthermore, one study found that the effect of socioeconomic status on place of death was only significant when patients received standard specialist palliative care. When patients received more intense care adapted to their needs, the effect of socioeconomic status on place of death was no longer seen. CONCLUSION: There is some evidence to suggest that use of specialist palliative care may modify the effect of socioeconomic status on place of death.

GPs' perceptions and experiences of public awareness campaigns for cancer: a qualitative enquiry.

BACKGROUND: Public awareness campaigns for cancer are used to alert the UK population to symptoms which, if experienced, should be discussed with their general practitioner (GP). More timely diagnosis of cancer is assumed possible if patients with the appropriate symptoms present to GPs and GPs recognise the need to act on these symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To investigate GPs' perceptions and experiences of public awareness campaigns for cancer. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 55 GPs from practices in the North and North East of England and Greater London. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Repeated reading of GP transcripts engendered thematic analysis and co-coding ensured legitimacy of findings. RESULTS: Participants supported the underpinning ethos of public health campaigns and articulated a commitment to engaging with patients with respect to cancer warning signs and symptoms despite the common perception that public awareness campaigns increased numbers of consultations. Tensions were evident with regard to increased demands on GP time and primary care resources during a period of major upheaval within the NHS. Concern was raised that some patients remain outwith the reach of campaign messages. The complexity of addressing how public health messages compete with other issues in people's lives was identified as challenging. CONCLUSIONS: General practitioners provided insight into why some members of the general public do not engage with public health messages. Public health/primary care interaction that incorporates GPs' knowledge of their patient populations could advance the search for solutions to a more robust approach to earlier cancer recognition and referral in primary care.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control.

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise­from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists­has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care­its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families­are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

Exploring GPs' experiences of using diagnostic tools for cancer: a qualitative study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The UK has an estimated 5-10000 extra cancer deaths each year when compared to other European countries and diagnostic delays are thought to make a significant contribution to this. One of the initiatives in England intended to support primary care professionals has been the development of cancer risk assessment tools (RATs). These tools assist in identifying and quantifying the risk of cancer in symptomatic primary care patients. OBJECTIVE: To explore GPs' experiences of incorporating the RATs for lung and bowel cancers into their clinical practice and in so doing, identify constraints and facilitators to the wider dissemination of the tools in primary care. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews over the telephone with 11 project managers who implemented the study and 23 GPs who used the tool. The interviews were digitally recorded, professionally transcribed verbatim and analysed through the construction of a 'thematic framework'. RESULTS: The training and support package was fundamental to the successful integration of the RATs into GPs' daily routines. Ongoing support from cancer networks alongside acknowledgement of the clinical expertize of the GPs by those implementing the study enhanced GPs' uptake of the tool in practice. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that the embedding of clinical decision support tools into clinical practice is more likely to be achieved when they are perceived to support but not supersede the clinical judgement of their users. This element of our findings is a focal point of this article.

Core intended learning outcomes for tackling health inequalities in undergraduate medicine.

BACKGROUND: Despite there being a concerted effort in recent years to influence what doctors can do to tackle health inequalities in the UK, there has been limited policy focus on what undergraduate students need to learn at medical school in preparation for this. This project led by members of the Health Inequalities Group of the Royal College of General Practitioners in collaboration with the Institute of Health Equity, University College London sought to fill this gap. DISCUSSION: We conducted a Delphi poll using our teaching and stakeholder networks. We identified 5 areas for learning focusing on key knowledge and skills. These were population concepts, health systems, marginalised patient groups, cultural diversity and ethics. These intended learning outcomes about health inequalities represent the best available evidence to date for colleagues seeking to develop core undergraduate medical curricula on the topic.

Predictors of anxiety and depression in people with colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: People living with colorectal cancer are at risk of anxiety and depression. We investigated what factors were most highly associated with these. METHODS: Four hundred and ninety-six people with colorectal cancer completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Data on functioning, symptoms, illness perceptions and social difficulties were collected by questionnaire. Case-note-identified disease, treatment and co-morbidity data were recorded. Multiple logistic regression identified factors independently predictive of anxiety and depression caseness. RESULTS: Self-reported history of anxiety/depression predicted anxiety but not depression caseness. Depression caseness predicted anxiety caseness (p = 0.043), as did poorer self-reported cognitive functioning (p = 0.001), dyspnoea (p = 0.015) or diarrhoea (p = 0.021), reporting a high negative life and emotional impact (p < 0.001) and having difficulties with finance (p = 0.007). Having neo-adjuvant radiotherapy increased the odds of depression caseness (p = 0.007), as did poorer physical (p = 0.007), cognitive (p < 0.001) and social (p < 0.001) functioning, having constipation (p = 0.011), reporting a high negative life and emotional impact (p < 0.001), having difficulties with personal care (p = 0.022) and communicating with others (p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Levels of anxiety caseness were similar to those of non-clinical samples, but depression caseness was higher, particularly in those who had received neo-adjuvant radiotherapy. Most factors associated with possible or probable depression may be modified with appropriate intervention.

Where are the inequalities in ovarian cancer care in a country with universal healthcare? A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer from more deprived areas may face barriers to accessing timely, quality healthcare. We evaluated the literature for any association between socioeconomic group, treatments received and hospital delay among patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer in the United Kingdom, a country with universal healthcare. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCIE, AMED, PsycINFO and HMIC from inception to January 2023. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. UK-based studies were included if they reported socioeconomic measures and an association with either treatments received or hospital delay. The inclusion of studies from one country ensured greater comparability. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool, and a narrative synthesis was conducted. The review is reported to PRISMA 2020 and registered with PROSPERO [CRD42022332071]. RESULTS: Out of 2876 references screened, ten were included. Eight studies evaluated treatments received, and two evaluated hospital delays. We consistently observed socioeconomic inequalities in the likelihood of surgery (range of odds ratios 0.24-0.99) and chemotherapy (range of odds ratios 0.70-0.99) among patients from the most, compared with the least, deprived areas. There were no associations between socioeconomic groups and hospital delay. POLICY SUMMARY: Ovarian cancer treatments differed between socioeconomic groups despite the availability of universal healthcare. Further research is needed to understand why, though suggested reasons include patient choice, health literacy, and financial and employment factors. Qualitative research would provide a rich understanding of the complex factors that drive these inequalities.

Where are the inequalities in colorectal cancer care in a country with universal healthcare? A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer living in more deprived areas experience worse survival than those in more affluent areas. Those living in more deprived areas face barriers to accessing timely, quality healthcare. These barriers may contribute to socioeconomic inequalities in survival. We evaluated the literature for any association between socioeconomic group, hospital delay and treatments received among patients with colorectal cancer in the UK, a country with universal healthcare. DESIGN: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCIE, AMED and PsycINFO were searched from inception to January 2023. Grey literature, including HMIC, BASE and Google Advanced Search, and forward and backward citation searches were conducted. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts and full-text articles. Observational UK-based studies were included if they reported socioeconomic measures and an association with either hospital delay or treatments received. The QUIPS tool assessed bias risk, and a narrative synthesis was conducted. The review is reported to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020. RESULTS: 41 of the 7209 identified references were included. 12 studies evaluated 7 different hospital intervals. There was a significant association between area-level deprivation and a longer time from first presentation in primary care to diagnosis. 32 studies evaluated treatments received. There were socioeconomic inequalities in surgery and chemotherapy but not radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Patients with colorectal cancer face inequalities across the cancer care continuum. Further research is needed to understand why and what evidence-based actions can reduce these inequalities in treatment. Qualitative research of patients and clinicians conducted across various settings would provide a rich understanding of the complex factors that drive these inequalities. Further research should also consider using a causal approach to future studies to considerably strengthen the interpretation. Clinicians can try and mitigate some potential causes of colorectal cancer inequalities, including signposting to financial advice and patient transport schemes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022347652.