Table 2:
Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the Illinois Rural Cancer Assessment respondents by post-treatment communication and follow-up care utilization (n = 139)
| PPCQ1 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | High | Low/Medium | p-value | ||||
| N (%) | 139 | 100% | 45 | 32% | 94 | 68% | -- |
| SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS | |||||||
| Age, Mean (SD)2 | 58.09 | 12.10 | 58.73 | 12.4 | 57.79 | 12.00 | 0.67 |
| Gender, n (%)3 | 0.04 | ||||||
| Male | 24 | 17% | 12 | 27% | 12 | 13% | |
| Female | 115 | 83% | 33 | 73% | 82 | 87% | |
| Race, n (%)3 | 0.62 | ||||||
| Non-Hispanic White | 126 | 91% | 40 | 89% | 86 | 92% | |
| Other | 13 | 9% | 5 | 11% | 8 | 8% | |
| Marital Status, n (%)3 | 0.87 | ||||||
| Married | 97 | 70% | 31 | 69% | 66 | 70% | |
| Not married | 42 | 30% | 14 | 31% | 28 | 30% | |
| Education, n (%) 3 | 0.17 | ||||||
| <Bachelor’s Degree | 78 | 56% | 29 | 64% | 49 | 52% | |
| ≥Bachelor’s Degree | 61 | 44% | 16 | 36% | 45 | 48% | |
| Employment Status, n (%)3 | 0.44 | ||||||
| Employed | 86 | 62% | 26 | 58% | 60 | 64% | |
| Not employed | 52 | 37% | 19 | 42% | 33 | 35% | |
| Missing | 1% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1% | ||
| Annual household income, n (%)3 | |||||||
| <$50,000 | 67 | 48% | 26 | 61% | 41 | 46% | 0.12 |
| ≥$50,001 | 65 | 47% | 17 | 40% | 48 | 54% | |
| Missing | 7 | 5% | 2 | 4% | 5 | 5% | |
| Private insurance, n (%)3 | 0.35 | ||||||
| Yes | 79 | 57% | 23 | 51% | 56 | 40% | |
| No | 60 | 43% | 22 | 49% | 38 | 60% | |
| Socioeconomic composite (education, income, and insurance)2,4 | 0.14 | ||||||
| Tertile 1 (Range: −2.47 to −0.47) | 43 | 31% | 19 | 42% | 24 | 26% | |
| Tertile 2 (Range: −0.37 to 0.52) | 43 | 31% | 11 | 24% | 32 | 34% | |
| Tertile 3 (Range: 0.62 to 1.30) | 46 | 33% | 13 | 29% | 33 | 35% | |
| Missing | 7 | 5% | 2 | 4% | 5 | 5% | |
| County rurality5 | 0.09 | ||||||
| Populations of ≥20,000 (RUCC <4) | 54 | 39% | 22 | 49% | 32 | 34% | |
| Populations of <20,000 (RUCC 4+) | 85 | 61% | 23 | 51% | 62 | 66% | |
| CLINICAL COVARIATES | |||||||
| Cancer Sites, n (%)3,6 | 0.94 | ||||||
| Breast cancer | 58 | 41.7 | 19 | 42% | 39 | 42% | |
| Other | 81 | 58.3 | 26 | 58% | 55 | 59% | |
| Currently being Treated, n(%) | 0.31 | ||||||
| Yes | 42 | 30% | 11 | 24% | 31 | 33% | |
| No | 97 | 70% | 34 | 76% | 63 | 67% | |
| Total Comorbidities, M (SD)2,7 | |||||||
| 5.40 | 3.26 | 4.89 | 3.14 | 5.65 | 3.30 | 0.20 | |
| Treatment-related symptoms (Global Distress), M (SD)2,8 | |||||||
| 0.78 | 078 | 0.55 | 0.67 | 0.88 | 0.81 | 0.02 | |
| QUALITY OF LIFE (QOL), M (SD)2,9 | |||||||
| Social Well-being | 18.64 | 5.7 | 17.91 | 5.38 | 20.16 | 4.39 | 0.02 |
| Functional Well-being | 19.75 | 6.45 | 18.73 | 6.18 | 21.87 | 6.55 | 0.007 |
| Physical Well-being | 21.55 | 5.46 | 21.00 | 5.39 | 22.69 | 5.51 | 0.09 |
Patient Provider Communication was measured 4-item survey instrument from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey’s (MEPS). [34] Experience with Cancer Care section
Mean values, standard deviations, and p-values were obtained by accessing between group different between high patient-provider communication and low/medium patient provider communication using one-way ANOVA tests within SPSS.
Frequencies, percentages, and p-values were obtained by conducting Person chi-squared tests within SPSS.
Teritles were created based on the SES composite score with the maximum value of 1.30 indicating most disadvantaged and the minimum value of −2.47 indicating least disadvantage.
Rural Urban Continuum Code (RUCC). RUCC 1–3 codes incorporate populations with ≥20,000 residents in metropolitan areas. RUCC 4–9 incorporate urban and completely rural areas with populations of <20,000.
Other within this category includes the following cancer sites: testicular, melanoma, skin, lung, bone, kidney, bladder, stomach, prostate, pancreatic, thyroid, colon, liver, rectal, Hodgkins Lymphoma, non-Hodgkins Lympohma, and leukemia.
Data were derived from the Comorbidity Questionnaire [35]. Responses for comorbidities are dichotomous with participants selecting either “yes” or “no.” The ranges are respectively 0 to 14.
Global Distress was measured by the 24 items of the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale (MSAS). 0–4 was the possible range for this variable [36].
Range values social well-being, functional well-being, and physical well-being are 0–28 with higher scores indicating better quality of life [33].