ABSTRACT
Purpose: The global rise in cancer incidence has been accompanied by disproportionately high morbidity and mortality rates in low- and middle-income countries. Many patients who are offered potentially curative treatment for cervical cancer in low- and middle-income countries never return to start treatment for reasons that are poorly documented and little understood. We investigated the interplay of sociodemographic, financial, and geographic factors as barriers to care among such patients in Botswana and Zimbabwe. Methods and Materials: Patients seen in consultation between 2019 and 2021 who were >3 months late for an appointment to initiate definitive treatment were contacted via telephone and invited to complete a survey. Afterward, an intervention connected patients with resources and counseling to return for treatment. Follow-up data were collected 3 months later to ascertain the outcomes of the intervention. Fisher exact tests analyzed the relationship between the putative number and types of barriers and demographics. Results: We recruited 40 women who initially presented for oncology care but did not return for treatment at [Princess Marina Hospital] in Botswana (n = 20) and [Parirenyatwa General Hospital] in Zimbabwe (n = 20) to complete the survey. Overall, married women experienced more barriers than unmarried women (P < .001), and unemployed women were 10 times more likely to report a financial barrier than employed women (P = .02). In Zimbabwe, financial barriers and belief-associated barriers (eg, fear of treatment) were reported. In Botswana, many patients noted scheduling obstacles associated with administrative delays and COVID-19. At follow-up, 16 Botswana patients and 4 Zimbabwe patients had returned for treatment. Conclusions: Financial and belief barriers identified in Zimbabwe showcase the importance of targeting cost and health literacy to reduce apprehensions. In Botswana, administrative challenges could be addressed with patient navigation. Improving our understanding of the specific barriers to cancer care could enable us to help patients who might otherwise default.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Most Zimbabweans access medical care through tiered health systems. In 2013, HIV care was decentralized to primary care clinics; while oncology care remained centralized. Most persons in Zimbabwe with Kaposi sarcoma (KS) are diagnosed late in their disease, and the prognosis is poor. Little is known about whether educational interventions could improve KS outcomes in these settings. METHODS: Interventions to improve KS detection and management were evaluated at eight Zimbabwe primary care sites (four rural/four urban) that provided HIV care. Interventions included a standardized KS clinical evaluation tool, palliative care integration, standardized treatment and improved consultative services. Interventions were implemented between February 2013 and January 2016 using a randomized stepped-wedge cluster design. Sites were monitored for KS diagnosis rates and KS outcomes, including early diagnosis (T0 vs. T1 tumour stage), participant retention and mortality. Analyses controlled for within-clinic correlations. RESULTS: A total of 1102 persons with suspected KS (96% HIV positive) were enrolled: 47% incident (new diagnosis), 20% prevalent (previous diagnosis) and 33% determined as not KS. Early (T0) diagnosis increased post-intervention, though not significant statistically (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.48 [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.66-3.79], p = 0.37). New KS diagnosis rates increased 103% (95% CI: 11-273%), p = 0.02) post-intervention; although paired with an increased odds of incorrectly diagnosing KS (aOR = 2.08 [95% CI: 0.33-3.24], p = 0.001). Post-intervention, non-significant decreases in 90-day return rates (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.69 [95% CI: 0.38-1.45], p = 0.21) and survival (aHR = 1.36 [95% CI: 0.85-2.20], p = 0.20) were estimated. CONCLUSIONS: KS training interventions at urban and rural Zimbabwe decentralized primary care clinics significantly increased overall and incorrect KS diagnosis rates, but not early KS diagnosis rates, 90-day return rates or survival.
