A cross-sectional analysis of out-of-pocket expenses for people living with a cancer in rural and outer metropolitan Western Australia.

Objective To determine the extent of medical and non-medical out-of-pocket expenses (OOPE) among regional/rural and outer metropolitan Western Australian patients diagnosed with cancer, and the factors associated with higher costs. Methods Cross-sectional data were collected from adult patients living in four regional/rural areas and two outer metropolitan regions in Western Australia who had been diagnosed with breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer. Consenting participants were mailed demographic and financial questionnaires, and requested to report all OOPE related to their cancer treatment. Results The median total OOPE reported by 308 regional/rural participants and 119 outer metropolitan participants were A$1518 (interquartile range (IQR): A$581-A$3769) and A$2855 (IQR: A$958-A$7142) respectively. Participants most likely to experience higher total OOPE were younger than 65 years of age, male, resided in the outer metropolitan area, worked prior to diagnosis, had private health insurance, were in a relationship, and underwent surgery. Multivariate analysis of regional/rural participants revealed that receiving care at a rural cancer centre was associated with significantly lower non-medical OOPE (estimated mean A$805, 95% confidence interval (CI): A$735-A$875, P=0.038; compared with other rural participants (A$1347, 95% CI: A$743-A$1951, P<0.001)). Conclusion The cancer patients who participated in this study experienced variation in OOPE, with outer metropolitan participants reporting higher OOPE compared with their regional/rural counterparts. There is a need for cost transparency and access to care close to home, so that patients can make informed choices about where to receive their care. What is known about the topic? In recent years, OOPE for health care in general and cancer in particular have been widely debated by consumers and not-for-profit organisations; the topic has attracted much political attention because it affects both equity and access to care and has wider financial implications for the community. Research studies and reports from both consumer organisations and a Ministerial Advisory Committee found that cancer patients can face exorbitant out-of-pocket costs, and that individuals with private health insurance and those with prostate and breast cancer reported higher costs. In Western Australia, a cancer centre providing comprehensive cancer care was established in the second most populous region to ameliorate the high costs for travel and accommodation that regional cancer patients are known to experience. What does this paper add? This study is unique because it collected detailed cost information from patients and reports on the OOPE of regional/rural and outer metropolitan Western Australian patients receiving care for one of the four most common cancers; it therefore offers novel insight into the experiences of these groups. This study demonstrates that outer metropolitan cancer patients are experiencing much higher OOPE compared with regional/rural cancer patients. Additionally, regional/rural study participants who accessed a Regional Cancer Centre experienced significantly lower non-medical OOPE, compared with regional/rural study participants receiving care elsewhere. What are the implications for practitioners? First, there is a need for improved communication of OOPE to minimise costs to the patient, for example, by facilitating access to local cancer care. Health service providers and insurance companies can improve cost transparency for cancer patients by making this information more readily available, allowing patients to make informed financial choices about where to seek care. Second, the needs of working patients deserve specific attention. These patients face significant work uncertainty and additional distress following a cancer diagnosis.

Translating research into practice: outcomes from the Healthy Living after Cancer partnership project.

BACKGROUND: Healthy Living after Cancer (HLaC) was a national dissemination and implementation study of an evidence-based lifestyle intervention for cancer survivors. The program was imbedded into existing telephone cancer information and support services delivered by Australian state-based Cancer Councils (CC). We report here the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of the program. METHODS: In this phase IV study (single-group, pre-post design) participants - survivors of any type of cancer, following treatment with curative intent - received up to 12 nurse/allied health professional-led telephone health coaching calls over 6 months. Intervention delivery was grounded in motivational interviewing, with emphasis on evidence-based behaviour change strategies. Using the RE-AIM evaluation framework, primary outcomes were reach, indicators of program adoption, implementation, costs and maintenance. Secondary (effectiveness) outcomes were participant-reported anthropometric, behavioural and psychosocial variables including: weight; physical activity; dietary intake; quality-of-life; treatment side-effects; distress; and fear of cancer recurrence and participant satisfaction. Changes were evaluated using linear mixed models, including terms for timepoint (0/6 months), strata (Cancer Council), and timepoint x strata. RESULTS: Four of 5 CCs approached participated in the study. In total, 1183 cancer survivors were referred (mostly via calls to the Cancer Council telephone information service). Of these, 90.4% were eligible and 88.7% (n = 791) of those eligible consented to participate. Retention rate was 63.4%. Participants were mostly female (88%), aged 57 years and were overweight (BMI = 28.8 ± 6.5 kg/m2). Improvements in all participant-reported outcomes (standardised effect sizes of 0.1 to 0.6) were observed (p < 0.001). The program delivery costs were on average AU$427 (US$296) per referred cancer survivor. CONCLUSIONS: This telephone-delivered lifestyle intervention, which was feasibly implemented by Cancer Councils, led to meaningful and statistically significant improvements in cancer survivors' health and quality-of-life at a relatively low cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) - ACTRN12615000882527 (registered on 24/08/2015).

' If I don't have that sort of money again, what happens?': adapting a qualitative model to conceptualise the consequences of out-of-pocket expenses for cancer patients in mixed health systems.

Objective The aim of this study was to explore Western Australian cancer patients' experiences of out-of-pocket expenses (OOPE) during diagnosis and cancer treatment using a phenomenological approach. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive convenience sample of 40 Western Australian cancer patients diagnosed with breast, lung, prostate or colorectal cancer. Participants were asked about the impact of their diagnosis, the associated costs and their experience within the health system. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis. Results Three key themes influencing participant OOPE experiences were identified: (1) personal circumstances; (2) communication with health providers; and (3) coping strategies. Despite Australia's public healthcare system, several participants found the costs affected their financial security and resorted to coping strategies including medication rationing and restrictive household budgeting. The key themes had a complex and interrelated effect on patient OOPE experiences and were used to adapt Carrera et al.'s model of economic consequences of cancer treatment on the patient and patient coping to describe these relationships in a mixed healthcare system. Conclusion Organised efforts must be implemented to mitigate maladaptive coping strategies being used by cancer patients: (1) health providers should seek informed financial consent from patients before commencing treatment; and (2) financial aid and support schemes for cancer patients should be reviewed to ensure they are delivered equitably. What is known on this topic? The financial cost of cancer can have significant adverse effects on cancer patients. Although financial transparency is desired by cancer patients, its implementation in practice is not clear. What does this paper add? This study adapts a conceptual model for the economic consequences of a cancer diagnosis and repurposes it for a mixed public-private health system, providing a framework for understanding downstream consequences of cancer costs and highlighting opportunities for intervention. What are the implications for health practitioners? Health practitioners need to initiate discussions concerning treatment costs earlier with cancer patients. There are several resources and guides available to assist and facilitate financial transparency. Without urgent attention to the financial consequences of cancer treatment and related expenses, we continue to leave patients at risk of resorting to maladaptive coping strategies, such as medication rationing and restrictive household budgeting.

Out-of-pocket expenses experienced by rural Western Australians diagnosed with cancer.

PURPOSE: Out-of-pocket expenses (OOPE) can have a significant impact on patients' experiences of cancer treatment. This cross-sectional study sought to quantify the OOPEs experienced by rural cancer patients in Western Australia (WA), and determine factors that contributed to higher OOPE. METHODS: Four hundred people diagnosed with breast, lung, colorectal or prostate cancer who resided in selected rural regions of WA were recruited through the WA Cancer Registry and contacted at least 3 months after diagnosis to report the medical OOPE (such as surgery or chemotherapy, supportive care, medication and tests) and non-medical OOPE (such as travel costs, new clothing and utilities) they had experienced as a result of accessing and receiving treatment. Bootstrapped t tests identified demographic, financial and treatment-related factors to include in multivariate analysis, performed using log-linked generalised linear models with gamma distribution. RESULTS: After a median 21 weeks post-diagnosis, participants experienced an average OOPE of AU$2179 (bootstrapped 95% confidence interval $1873-$2518), and 45 (11%) spent more than 10% of their household income on these expenses. Participants likely to experience higher total OOPE were younger than 65 years (p = 0.008), resided outside the South West region (p = 0.007) and had private health insurance (PHI) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Rural WA cancer patients experience significant OOPE following their diagnosis. The impact these expenses have on patient wellbeing and their treatment decisions need to be further explored.

Implementing exercise in cancer care: study protocol to evaluate a community-based exercise program for people with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Clinical research has established the efficacy of exercise in reducing treatment-related side-effects and increasing wellbeing in people with cancer. Major oncology organisations have identified the importance of incorporating exercise in comprehensive cancer care but information regarding effective approaches to translating evidence into practice is lacking. This paper describes the implementation of a community-based exercise program for people with cancer and the protocol for program evaluation. METHODS/DESIGN: The Life Now Exercise program is a community-based exercise intervention designed to mitigate and rehabilitate the adverse effects of cancer and its treatment and improve physical and psychosocial wellbeing in people with cancer. Involvement in the program is open to people with any diagnosis of cancer who are currently receiving treatment or within 2 years of completing treatment. The 3-month intervention consists of twice weekly group-based exercise sessions administered in community exercise clinics under the supervision of exercise physiologists trained to deliver the program. Evaluation of the program involves measures of uptake, safety, adherence and effectiveness (including cost effectiveness) as assessed at the completion of the program and 6 months follow-up. DISCUSSION: To bridge the gap between research and practice, the Life Now Exercise program was designed and implemented to provide people with cancer access to evidence-based exercise medicine. The framework for program implementation and evaluation offers insight into the development of feasible, generalizable and sustainable supportive care services involving exercise. Community-based exercise programs specifically designed for people with cancer are necessary to facilitate adherence to international guidelines advising patients to participate in high-quality exercise. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12616001669482 (retrospectively registered 5 Dec 2016).

"Undressing" distress among cancer patients living in urban, regional, and remote locations in Western Australia.

PURPOSE: People diagnosed with cancer from rural and remote locations may experience heightened distress because of distance from cancer treatment and support services. We examined whether remoteness and other factors are associated with psychosocial distress and explored commonly reported problems among cancer patients in Western Australia (WA). METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, cancer patients newly referred to a Cancer Council WA Cancer Support Coordinator (CSC) were screened and assessed using the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List (PL) and a standardized form, respectively. The index of remoteness was the Australian Standard Geographical Classification. The association between remoteness, demographic variables, and the frequency of problems endorsed on the PL was analyzed using bivariate analyses and a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) regression. RESULTS: Of 1032 patients referred to a CSC, 466 were screened (45.2 %) with complete data available for 441 patients. Patients from remote areas reported fewer problems than patients from urban and regional locations. Increasing remoteness was not associated with higher distress (r = -0.04, p = 0.43). Concerns reported differed by remoteness category and included worry, sadness, fears, finances, transportation, and physical symptoms. More emotional problems were independently associated with higher distress (ß = 0.47, p < 0.001), explaining 17.31 % of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that increasing remoteness is associated with higher distress. Emotional concerns and physical problems appear to be prevalent among cancer patients irrespective of urban or rural location. Specific concerns detected by distress screening, particularly emotional concerns, may warrant further assessment and targeted referrals.

Healthy Living after Cancer: a dissemination and implementation study evaluating a telephone-delivered healthy lifestyle program for cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Given evidence shows physical activity, a healthful diet and weight management can improve cancer outcomes and reduce chronic disease risk, the major cancer organisations and health authorities have endorsed related guidelines for cancer survivors. Despite these, and a growing evidence base on effective lifestyle interventions, there is limited uptake into survivorship care. METHODS/DESIGN: Healthy Living after Cancer (HLaC) is a national dissemination and implementation study that will evaluate the integration of an evidence-based lifestyle intervention for cancer survivors into an existing telephone cancer information and support service delivered by Australian state-based Cancer Councils. Eligible participants (adults having completed cancer treatment with curative intent) will receive 12 health coaching calls over 6 months from Cancer Council nurses/allied health professionals targeting national guidelines for physical activity, healthy eating and weight control. Using the RE-AIM evaluation framework, primary outcomes are service-level indicators of program reach, adoption, implementation/costs and maintenance, with secondary (effectiveness) outcomes of patient-reported anthropometric, behavioural and psychosocial variables collected at pre- and post-program completion. The total participant accrual target across four participating Cancer Councils is 900 over 3 years. DISCUSSION: The national scope of the project and broad inclusion of cancer survivors, alongside evaluation of service-level indicators, associated costs and patient-reported outcomes, will provide the necessary practice-based evidence needed to inform future allocation of resources to support healthy living among cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR)--ACTRN12615000882527 (registered on 24/08/2015).