M.Sc. Public Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
International Centre for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2023 Dec 13;18(12):e0285146. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285146. eCollection 2023.
Over 1.3 billion people, or 16% of the world's population, live with some form of disability. Recent studies have reported that people with disabilities (PwD) might not be receiving state-of-the-art treatment for cancer as their non-disabled peers; our objective was to systematically review this topic.
A systematic review was undertaken to compare cancer outcomes and quality of cancer care between adults with and without disabilities (NIHR Prospero register ID number: CRD42022281506). A search of the literature was performed in July 2022 across five databases: EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and CINAHL databases. Peer-reviewed quantitative research articles, published in English from 2000 to 2022, with interventional or observational study designs, comparing cancer outcomes between a sample of adult patients with disabilities and a sample without disabilities were included. Studies focused on cancer screening and not treatment were excluded, as well as editorials, commentaries, opinion papers, reviews, case reports, case series under 10 patients and conference abstracts. Studies were evaluated by one reviewer for risk of bias based on a set of criteria according to the SIGN 50 guidelines. A narrative synthesis was conducted according to the Cochrane SWiM guidelines, with tables summarizing study characteristics and outcomes. This research received no external funding.
Thirty-one studies were included in the systematic review. Compared to people without disabilities, PwD had worse cancer outcomes, in terms of poorer survival and higher overall and cancer-specific mortality. There was also evidence that PwD received poorer quality cancer care, including lower access to state-of-the-art care or curative-intent therapies, treatment delays, undertreatment or excessively invasive treatment, worse access to in-hospital services, less specialist healthcare utilization, less access to pain medications and inadequate end-of-life quality of care.
Limitations of this work include the exclusion of qualitative research, no assessment of publication bias, selection performed by only one reviewer, results from high-income countries only, no meta-analysis and a high risk of bias in 15% of included studies. In spite of these limitations, our results show that PwD often experience severe disparities in cancer care with less guideline-consistent care and higher mortality than people without disabilities. These findings raise urgent questions about how to ensure equitable care for PwD; in order to prevent avoidable morbidity and mortality, cancer care programs need to be evaluated and urgently improved, with specific training of clinical staff, more disability inclusive research, better communication and shared decision-making with patients and elimination of physical, social and cultural barriers.
全球有超过 13 亿人(占世界总人口的 16%)存在某种形式的残疾。最近的研究报告称,残疾人士(PwD)可能无法像非残疾人士一样获得最先进的癌症治疗;我们的目标是系统地审查这一主题。
我们进行了一项系统审查,以比较残疾成年人和非残疾成年人的癌症结局和癌症护理质量(NIHR Prospero 注册号:CRD42022281506)。2022 年 7 月,我们在五个数据库中进行了文献搜索:EMBASE、Medline、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science 和 CINAHL 数据库。纳入了研究设计为干预或观察性研究的同行评审定量研究文章,这些文章比较了残疾患者样本和非残疾患者样本的癌症结局,且这些文章均发表于 2000 年至 2022 年期间,使用英语撰写。我们排除了仅关注癌症筛查而非治疗的研究、社论、评论、意见论文、综述、少于 10 例患者的病例报告和病例系列以及会议摘要。根据 SIGN 50 指南中的一套标准,由一名评审员评估研究的偏倚风险。我们根据 Cochrane SWiM 指南进行了叙述性综合,使用表格总结研究特征和结局。本研究没有接受外部资金。
系统评价共纳入 31 项研究。与非残疾人士相比,残疾人士的癌症结局更差,包括生存率较差以及总死亡率和癌症特异性死亡率较高。还有证据表明,残疾人士接受的癌症护理质量较差,包括获得最先进的护理或治愈性治疗的机会较少、治疗延迟、治疗不足或过度侵入性治疗、获得院内服务的机会较差、利用专科医疗保健的机会较少、获得止痛药物的机会较少以及临终关怀质量不足。
这项工作的局限性包括排除定性研究、未评估发表偏倚、仅由一名评审员进行选择、仅来自高收入国家的结果、没有荟萃分析以及纳入研究中有 15%存在高偏倚风险。尽管存在这些局限性,但我们的研究结果表明,残疾人士在癌症护理方面经常面临严重的差异,他们的护理指南一致性较差,死亡率高于非残疾人士。这些发现提出了一个紧迫的问题,即如何确保为残疾人士提供公平的护理;为了预防可避免的发病率和死亡率,需要评估和紧急改进癌症护理计划,对临床工作人员进行专门培训,进行更多残疾包容性研究,改善与患者的沟通和共同决策,并消除身体、社会和文化障碍。