Back to Search Start Over

Urban–Rural Disparities in the Lung Cancer Surgical Treatment Pathway: The Paradox of a Rich, Small Region

Authors :
Eleonora Maddalena Minerva
Adele Tessitore
Stefano Cafarotti
Miriam Patella
Source :
Frontiers in Surgery, Vol 9 (2022)
Publication Year :
2022
Publisher :
Frontiers Media S.A., 2022.

Abstract

IntroductionRural populations in large countries often receive delayed or less effective diagnosis and treatment for lung cancer. Differences are related to population-based factors such as lower pro capita income or increased risk factors or to differences in access to facilities. Switzerland is a small, rich country with peculiar geographic and urban characteristics.We explored the relationship between lung cancer diagnostic–surgical pathway and urban–rural residency in our region.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 280 consecutive patients treated for primary non-small cell lung cancer at our institution (2017–2021). This is a regional tertiary center for diagnosis and treatment, and data were extracted from a prospectively collected clinical database. We included anatomical lung resection. Collected variables included patients and surgical characteristics, risk factors, comorbidities, histology and staging, symptoms (vs. incidental diagnosis), general practitioner (GP) involvement, health insurance, and suspected test-treatment interval. The exposure was rurality, defined by the 2009 rural–urban residency classification from the Department of Land.ResultsA total of 150 patients (54%) lived in rural areas. Rural patients had a higher rate of smoking history (93% vs. 82%; p = 0.007). Symptomatic vs. incidental diagnosis did not differ as well as previous cancer rate, insurance, and pathological staging. In rural patients, there was a greater burden of comorbidities (mean Charlson Comorbidity Index Age-Adjusted 5.3 in rural population vs. 4.8 in urban population, p = 0.05), and GP was more involved in the diagnostic pathway (51% vs. 39%, p = 0.04). The interval between the first suspected test and treatment was significantly shorter (56 vs. 66.5 days, p = 0.03). Multiple linear regression with backward elimination was run. These variables statistically predicted the time from the first suspected test and surgical treatment [F(3, 270), p

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
2296875X
Volume :
9
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
Frontiers in Surgery
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.3d40c1e279ac4b4bbae71466a72244ed
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.884048