Quality of Life of Head and Neck Cancer Survivors in Urban and Rural Ireland - Audrey Thomas

939 views

Published on

A presentation given at the Irish Cancer Society's Survivorship Research Day at the Aviva Stadium, Dublin on Thursday, September 20th, 2013.

Quality of Life of Head and Neck Cancer Survivors in Urban and Rural Ireland - Audrey Thomas

Published in: Health & Medicine
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
939
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
213
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Note: bold are significant at 0.05 level
  • Quality of Life of Head and Neck Cancer Survivors in Urban and Rural Ireland - Audrey Thomas

    1. 1. Quality of Life of Head and Neck Cancer Survivors in Urban and Rural Ireland Audrey Alforque Thomas1 Timmons A2, Molcho M1, Gallagher P3, O’Neill C1, Butow P4, Gooberman-Hill R5, O’Sullivan E6, Sharp L2 1National University of Ireland, Galway; 2National Cancer Registry Ireland; 3Dublin City University; 4University of Sydney, Australia; 5University of Bristol, UK; 6University College Cork Funding from Interdisciplinary Capacity Enhancement Fellowship Health Research Board
    2. 2. Ireland head and neck cancer Urban – Rural Comparisons • Mostly incidence, treatment, clinical outcomes • United States, Australia, Canada, Scotland • Breast, colorectal, prostate cancers health-related quality of lifeHow does health-related quality of life for head and neck cancer survivors differ in urban versus rural Ireland ?
    3. 3. SuN Study • Support Needs of Survivors of Head & Neck Cancer Study • Data collection funded by HRB • Respondents identified from the Registry • 583 head and neck cancer survivors • Linked to Registry data The SuN Study Head & Neck Cancer
    4. 4. • Composite variable • Distance to treating hospital • Population density • Self-reported area • Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) • Physical • Social/Family • Emotional • Functional • Head and Neck module Measuring urban/rural and wellbeing
    5. 5. Analysis FACT domain scores were skewed • Bootstrap linear regression • Bias-corrected and accelerated confidence intervals • Similar to OLS linear regression
    6. 6. Living in a rural area is associated with higher wellbeing Physical Social Emotional Functional HN Rural 1.27 0.89 0.99 1.41 1.55 Female -0.22 1.64 -1.15 0.56 0.91 Medical card -1.78 -0.79 -1.63 -2.44 -2.24 Married/cohabiting 0.42 2.36 -0.18 1.76 1.10 Third Level education 1.96 -1.51 0.61 0.69 2.62 Age at survey 0.10 0.03 0.07 0.04 0.04 Cancer returned/spread -3.77 0.44 -1.93 -2.22 -4.34 Larynx -0.54 -0.24 -1.22 -1.65 -2.41 Mouth -0.61 0.61 -0.85 -0.28 -3.36 Pharynx -2.63 -1.17 -1.51 -2.65 -7.79 Coefficients in bold are significant at the 0.05 level
    7. 7. Living in a rural area is associated with higher wellbeing • Drift Hypothesis • Breeder Hypothesis • Biophilia Hypothesis • Rural culture Can only speculate about why there is a relationship Urban and rural cancer survivors have different life experiences.
    8. 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Eamonn O’Leary, Statistical consultant Neil McCluskey, Geographic information consultant Funding from Health Research Board

    ×