Re-interpreting the data on the cost and effectiveness of population screening for colorectal cancer in Australia

Three studies report estimates of the cost and effectiveness of alternate strategies for screening the average-risk Australian population for colorectal cancer. The options considered are faecal occult blood testing, double contrast barium enema, sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. At present, there is no consensus over which screening method is optimal by the economic criterion. Also, the existing studies report a mixture of average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios derived from data collected between 1994 and 2002. We suggest average cost-effectiveness ratios are not useful for decision-making and illustrate how they differ from the preferred incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. We then update the cost data reported in the three studies to 2002 prices and calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios where not previously available. Our re-analysis of one study contradicts the conclusions drawn by the authors, who had only calculated average cost-effectiveness ratios. In particular, we find their recommendation of population screening with colonoscopy would cause, annually, between 33 and 1,322 years of life to be lost and between $M17 and$M87 to be wasted. Based on updated cost data and the incremental analysis, our findings indicate that population screening using biennial faecal occult blood testing ($39,459 per life-year gained), annual faecal occult blood testing ($30,556 per life-year gained) and colonoscopy ($26,587 per life-year gained) are cost-effective. Hence, the decision over which method of screening is optimal remains ambiguous across the three studies. We recommend policy-makers choose the study they believe produces the most accurate estimates of cost and health effect, identify their willingness to pay for health benefits and consider other issues relevant to the decision

The contribution of psychosocial factors to socioeconomic differences in food purchasing

In developed countries the relationship between socioeconomic position (SEP) and health is unequivocal. Those who are socioeconomically disadvantaged are known to experience higher morbidity and mortality from a range of chronic diet-related conditions compared to those of higher SEP. Socioeconomic inequalities in diet are well established. Compared to their more advantaged counterparts, those of low SEP are consistently found to consume diets less consistent with dietary guidelines (i.e. higher in fat, salt and sugar and lower in fibre, fruit and vegetables). Although the reasons for dietary inequalities remain unclear, understanding how such differences arise is important for the development of strategies to reduce health inequalities. Both environmental (e.g. proximity of supermarkets, price, and availability of foods) and psychosocial (e.g. taste preference, nutrition knowledge) influences are proposed to account for inequalities in food choices. Although in the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), and parts of Australia, environmental factors are associated with socioeconomic differences in food choices, these factors do not completely account for the observed inequalities. Internationally, this context has prompted calls for further exploration of the role of psychological and social factors in relation to inequalities in food choices. It is this task that forms the primary goal of this PhD research. In the small body of research examining the contribution of psychosocial factors to inequalities in food choices, studies have focussed on food cost concerns, nutrition knowledge or health concerns. These factors are generally found to be influential. However, since a range of psychosocial factors are known determinants of food choices in the general population, it is likely that a range of factors also contribute to inequalities in food choices. Identification of additional psychosocial factors of relevance to inequalities in food choices would provide new opportunities for health promotion, including the adaption of existing strategies. The methodological features of previous research have also hindered the advancement of knowledge in this area and a lack of qualitative studies has resulted in a dearth of descriptive information on this topic. This PhD investigation extends previous research by assessing a range of psychosocial factors in relation to inequalities in food choices using both quantitative and qualitative techniques. Secondary data analyses were undertaken using data obtained from two Brisbane-based studies, the Brisbane Food Study (N=1003, conducted in 2000), and the Sixty Families Study (N=60, conducted in 1998). Both studies involved main household food purchasers completing an interviewer-administered survey within their own home. Data pertaining to food-purchasing, and psychosocial, socioeconomic and demographic characteristics were collected in each study. The mutual goals of both the qualitative and quantitative phases of this investigation were to assess socioeconomic differences in food purchasing and to identify psychosocial factors relevant to any observed differences. The quantitative methods then additionally considered whether the associations examined differed according to the socioeconomic indicator used (i.e. income or education). The qualitative analyses made a unique contribution to this project by generating detailed descriptions of socioeconomic differences in psychosocial factors. Those with lower levels of income and education were found to make food purchasing choices less consistent with dietary guidelines compared to those of high SEP. The psychosocial factors identified as relevant to food-purchasing inequalities were: taste preferences, health concerns, health beliefs, nutrition knowledge, nutrition concerns, weight concerns, nutrition label use, and several other values and beliefs unique to particular socioeconomic groups. Factors more tenuously or inconsistently related to socioeconomic differences in food purchasing were cost concerns, and perceived adequacy of the family diet. Evidence was displayed in both the quantitative and qualitative analyses to suggest that psychosocial factors contribute to inequalities in food purchasing in a collective manner. The quantitative analyses revealed that considerable overlap in the socioeconomic variation in food purchasing was accounted for by key psychosocial factors of importance, including taste preference, nutrition concerns, nutrition knowledge, and health concerns. Consistent with these findings, the qualitative transcripts demonstrated the interplay between such influential psychosocial factors in determining food-purchasing choices. The qualitative analyses found socioeconomic differences in the prioritisation of psychosocial factors in relation to food choices. This is suggestive of complex cultural factors that distinguish advantaged and disadvantaged groups and result in socioeconomically distinct schemas related to health and food choices. Compared to those of high SEP, those of lower SEP were less likely to indicate that health concerns, nutrition concerns, or food labels influenced food choices, and exhibited lower levels of nutrition knowledge. In the absence of health or nutrition-related concerns, taste preferences tended to dominate the food purchasing choices of those of low SEP. Overall, while cost concerns did not appear to be a main determinant of socioeconomic differences in food purchasing, this factor had a dominant influence on the food choices of some of the most disadvantaged respondents included in this research. The findings of this study have several implications for health promotion. The integrated operation of psychosocial factors on food purchasing inequalities indicates that multiple psychosocial factors may be appropriate to target in health promotion. It also seems possible that the inter-relatedness of psychosocial factors would allow health promotion targeting a single psychosocial factor to have a flow-on affect in terms of altering other influential psychosocial factors. This research also suggests that current mass marketing approaches to health promotion may not be effective across all socioeconomic groups due to differences in the priorities and main factors of influence in food purchasing decisions across groups. In addition to the practical recommendations for health promotion, this investigation, through the critique of previous research, and through the substantive study findings, has highlighted important methodological considerations for future research. Of particular note are the recommendations pertaining to the selection of socioeconomic indicators, measurement of relevant constructs, consideration of confounders, and development of an analytical approach. Addressing inequalities in health has been noted as a main objective by many health authorities and governments internationally. It is envisaged that the substantive and methodological findings of this thesis will make a useful contribution towards this important goal

What women want: qualitative analysis of consumer evaluations of maternity care in Queensland, Australia

Background Maternity care reform plans have been proposed at state and national levels in Australia, but the extent to which these respond to maternity care consumers’ expressed needs is unclear. This study examines open-text survey comments to identify women’s unmet needs and priorities for maternity care. It is then considered whether these needs and priorities are addressed in current reform plans. Methods Women who had a live single or multiple birth in Queensland, Australia, in 2010 (n 3,635) were invited to complete a retrospective self-report survey. In addition to questions about clinical and interpersonal maternity care experiences from pregnancy to postpartum, women were asked an open-ended question “Is there anything else you’d like to tell us about having your baby?” This paper describes a detailed thematic analysis of open-ended responses from a random selection of 150 women (10% of 1,510 who responded to the question). Results Four broad themes emerged relevant to improving women’s experiences of maternity care: quality of care (interpersonal and technical); access to choices and involvement in decision-making; unmet information needs; and dissatisfaction with the care environment. Some of these topics are reflected in current reform goals, while others provide evidence of the need for further reforms. Conclusions The findings reinforce the importance of some existing maternity reform objectives, and describe how these might best be met. Findings affirm the importance of information provision to enable informed choices; a goal of Queensland and national reform agendas. Improvement opportunities not currently specified in reform agendas were also identified, including the quality of interpersonal relationships between women and staff, particular unmet information needs (e.g., breastfeeding), and concerns regarding the care environment (e.g., crowding and long waiting times)

Socioeconomic differences in food choices: Deficiencies in nutrition knowledge or simply too much on your plate?

Nutrition knowledge is associated with dietary choices in the general population and has been proposed to contribute to socioeconomic differences in food choices and corresponding socioeconomic gradients in mortality and morbidity for a number of diet-related illnesses. This paper explores current evidence regarding socioeconomic differences in nutrition knowledge, reviewing the components of nutrition knowledge that have been assessed, the dietary intake or food choice outcomes considered, and the socioeconomic indicators used. In addition, this paper considers how socioeconomic differences in nutrition knowledge may arise, and potential determinants of inequalities in the application of nutrition knowledge. It highlights issues to consider when developing strategies to improve nutrition knowledge and facilitate knowledge application among those of lower socioeconomic position

The contribution of three components of nutrition knowledge to socio-economic differences in food purchasing choices

Free to read Objectives: To assess socio-economic differences in three components of nutrition knowledge, i.e. knowledge of (i) the relationship between diet and disease, (ii) the nutrient content of foods and (iii) dietary guideline recommendations; furthermore, to determine if socio-economic differences in nutrition knowledge contribute to inequalities in food purchasing choices. Design: The cross-sectional study considered household food purchasing,nutrition knowledge, socio-economic and demographic information. Household food purchasing choices were summarised by three indices, based on self-reported purchasing of sixteen groceries, nineteen fruits and twenty-one vegetables. Socio-economic position (SEP) was measured by household income and education. Associations between SEP, nutrition knowledge and food purchasing were examined using general linear models adjusted for age, gender, household type and household size. Setting: Brisbane, Australia in 2000. Subjects: Main household food shoppers (n 1003, response rate 66?4 %), located in fifty small areas (Census Collectors Districts). Results: Shoppers in households of low SEP made food purchasing choices that were less consistent with dietary guideline recommendations: they were more likely to purchase grocery foods comparatively higher in salt, sugar and fat, and lower in fibre, and they purchased a narrower range of fruits and vegetables. Those of higher SEP had greater nutrition knowledge and this factor attenuated most associations between SEP and food purchasing choices. Among nutrition knowledge factors, knowledge of the relationship between diet and disease made the greatest and most consistent contribution to explaining socio-economic differences in food purchasing. Conclusions: Addressing inequalities in nutrition knowledge is likely to reduce socio-economic differences in compliance with dietary guidelines. Improving knowledge of the relationship between diet and disease appears to be a particularly relevant focus for health promotion aimed to reduce socio-economic differences in diet and related health inequalities

Prevalence, predictors, and correlates of supportive care needs among women 3-5 years after a diagnosis of endometrial cancer

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the prevalence, sociodemographic and clinical predictors, and physical and psychosocial correlates of unmet needs among women 3–5 years following treatment for endometrial cancer. Methods Women with endometrial cancer completed a survey around the time of diagnosis and again 3–5 years later. The follow-up survey asked women about their physical and psychosocial functioning and supportive care needs (CaSUN). Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression identified the predictors and correlates of women’s unmet needs 3–5 years after diagnosis. Results Of the 629 women who completed the cancer survivors’ unmet needs measure (CaSUN), 24 % (n = 153) women reported one or more unmet supportive care needs in the last month. Unmet needs at 3–5 years post-diagnosis were predicted by younger age (OR = 4.47; 95 % CI: 2.09–9.56) and advanced disease stage at diagnosis (OR = 2.47; 95 % CI: 1.38–4.45) and correlated with greater cancer symptoms (OR = 1.78; 95 % CI: 1.05–3.02), lower limb swelling (OR = 2.50; 95 % CI: 1.51–4.15), symptoms of anxiety (OR = 2.21; 95 % CI: 1.31–3.72), and less availability of social support (OR = 3.42; 95 % CI: 1.92–6.11). Women with a history of comorbidities (OR = 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.27–0.82) and those living in a rural area at the time of diagnosis (OR = 0.56; 95 % CI: 0.34–0.92) were less likely to report unmet needs. Conclusions Sociodemographic, health, and psychosocial factors seem important for identifying women who will or will not have unmet needs several years following endometrial cancer. Longitudinal assessments of people’s needs over the course of their cancer trajectory may be an effective way to identify areas that should receive further attention by health providers