Health-related quality of life in rural cancer survivors compared with their urban counterparts: a systematic review.

PURPOSE

We conducted a systematic review to describe health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in rural cancer survivors (RCS), and compare HRQOL between RCS and urban cancer survivors (UCS).

METHOD

We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL Plus, and PsycINFO for studies with HRQOL in adult cancer survivors living in rural, regional, remote, and urban areas, who had completed definitive primary cancer treatment, without evidence of residual disease. Where available, we used normative and clinically important values to ascribe meaning to HRQOL data.

FINDINGS

Fifteen studies (16 papers) were included. Most were from the US (n = 8) and reported on breast cancer survivors (n = 9). Six HRQOL instruments, collecting data across 16 domains, were used. Three instruments were specific to the survivorship phase. Normative and clinical data were available for 12 studies. Compared with normative populations, RCS had clinically worse physical HRQOL (6/12 studies), better social/family (5/7), and functional (3/6) HRQOL, and there were no differences in emotional or/mental HRQOL (9/12). In six studies with rural-urban comparator groups and normative and clinically important data, RCS and UCS had clinically worse physical (3/6 and 2/6, respectively) and better social/family (3/4 and 2/4 studies, respectively) HRQOL than normative populations. Functional HRQOL was better in RCS (2/4 studies) than UCS and normative populations. In 3/6 studies, there were no clinical differences in emotional or/mental HRQOL between RCS, UCS, and normative populations.

CONCLUSION

Overall, HRQOL is not clearly better or worse in RCS than UCS. Future research should include different tumor types, rural residents, and survivorship-specific HRQOL instruments.