Comparing spiritual wellbeing and illness perceptions between cancer patients from culturally and linguistically diverse and those from mainstream backgrounds in Australia.

OBJECTIVE

Cancer presents a significant health challenge, particularly within culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) populations. Religious, spiritual, and personal beliefs regarding illness may mitigate its psychological and physical impacts, varying with CALD status. This study aims to assess illness perceptions in Australian cancer patients from both CALD and Anglo-Australian backgrounds and to explore the associations between spiritual wellbeing and illness perceptions within these groups.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study, involving 119 cancer patients from CALD backgrounds (Arabic, Chinese, and Greek) and 50 Anglo-Australians. Spiritual wellbeing and cancer perception were assessed using the World Health Organization Quality of Life-Spirituality, Religiousness, and Personal Beliefs questionnaire and the revised Illness Perception Questionnaire, respectively. Linear regression models analyzed associations.

RESULTS

CALD patients perceived their cancer as less enduring (β - 4.74, 95%CI - 6.16, - 3.31) and symptoms as less predictable (- 4.96, 95%CI - 6.12, - 3.86) compared to Anglo-Australians. They had lower confidence in medical interventions (- 2.96, 95%CI - 3.36, - 1.22) and poorer illness understanding (- 4.66, 95%CI - 5.83, - 3.49). In Greek-speaking patients, an increase in spiritual wellbeing was associated with less favourable perceptions of treatment controllability (β - 2.25, 95%CI - 4.39, - 0.09). Conversely, for Chinese-speaking patients, an increase in spiritual wellbeing was associated with improved illness perception across all domains except for consequences and emotional representation. However, no significant association was observed for Arabic patients.

CONCLUSION

Differences in illness perceptions exist among CALD and Anglo-Australians. Spiritual wellbeing appears linked to more favourable perceptions; however, differential effects emerged among groups, emphasizing the need for culturally tailored interventions to improve outcomes.