White Victoria, Gough Karla, Ristevski Eli, Lisy Karolina, Webber Kate, Emery Jon, Gibbs Peter, IJzerman Maarten, Davis Nikki, Jefford Michael
School of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.
Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Support Care Cancer. 2025 Apr 21;33(5):401. doi: 10.1007/s00520-025-09461-2.
Multiple frameworks describing optimal cancer survivorship care recommend the development of systems to monitor delivery of quality care. This study reports the experiences of cancer survivorship care in Australia and examines associations with patient-level sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.
People aged ≥ 16 years, with any cancer receiving cancer care in a Victorian public hospital in 2018, were invited to complete a survey assessing care experiences. Seven items assessed follow-up care experiences with optimal care indicated by the response: 'Yes, definitely received', and sub-optimal care by responses 'Yes, I think so', 'No', and 'Not sure'. A composite score was derived with optimal care defined as positive experiences on the majority of items. Sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with optimal care were examined using multivariable logistic regression.
Of the 4998 (47% response rate) respondents, 3555 were receiving follow-up care. The item most respondents indicated receiving optimal care was 'receiving information about schedule of tests/check-ups' (73%), with optimal care least likely to be reported for the item 'receiving information about new symptoms needing investigation' (44%). Based on our composite measure, only 40% had optimal survivorship care overall. Those more likely to report optimal survivorship care were male, from lower socioeconomic advantage areas, reported excellent health, diagnosed with breast, prostate, lung or a haematological cancer, and diagnosed less recently.
Large numbers of Australian cancer survivors report sub-optimal survivorship care, with experiences varying by some sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Understanding reasons for differences can provide insight into strategies to ameliorate variations.
多个描述最佳癌症生存护理的框架建议建立系统来监测优质护理的提供情况。本研究报告了澳大利亚癌症生存护理的经验，并研究了与患者层面社会人口统计学和临床特征的关联。
邀请2018年在维多利亚州公立医院接受癌症护理的年龄≥16岁的任何癌症患者完成一项评估护理体验的调查。七个项目评估了随访护理体验，最佳护理的回答为“是的，肯定接受过”，次优护理的回答为“是的，我认为接受过”、“没有”和“不确定”。得出一个综合分数，将最佳护理定义为在大多数项目上有积极体验。使用多变量逻辑回归分析与最佳护理相关的社会人口统计学和临床因素。
在4998名受访者（回复率47%）中，3555人正在接受随访护理。大多数受访者表示接受最佳护理的项目是“收到检查/体检时间表的信息”（73%），而“收到需要调查的新症状的信息”这一项目报告最佳护理的可能性最小（44%）。根据我们的综合测量，总体上只有40%的人获得了最佳生存护理。更有可能报告获得最佳生存护理的人是男性，来自社会经济优势较低的地区，报告健康状况良好，被诊断患有乳腺癌、前列腺癌、肺癌或血液系统癌症，且诊断时间较久。
大量澳大利亚癌症幸存者报告生存护理欠佳，且体验因一些社会人口统计学和临床特征而异。了解差异原因可为改善差异的策略提供见解。
