Needs assessment of cancer survivors in Alaska

Abstract

Purpose Little is known about cancer survivors’ needs in Alaska. To address this knowledge gap, the Alaska Cancer Partnership conducted a needs assessment survey; our objectives were to identify unmet needs of Alaska’s cancer survivors; identify survivor sub-populations that might benefit from targeted interventions or programming; and develop recommendations for public health and community organizations and healthcare providers for addressing cancer survivors’ unmet needs. Methods Cancer survivors were identified using data from the Alaska Cancer Registry. A random sample of 2,600 individuals was selected to receive the survey, which assessed unmet needs across the following domains: information needs and medical care issues; quality of life; emotional and relationship issues related to cancer diagnoses; and support services. We calculated descriptive statistics for survey responses and assessed demographic predictors of unmet needs using Poisson regression. Results We received 335 survey responses, for a response of 13.7%. Only 29.9% of cancer survivors expressed that all their needs were met. The most highly ranked unmet needs were as follows: help to reduce stress in life; to know doctors were coordinating care; and managing concerns about cancer coming back. After adjustment, men, adults younger than 65 at diagnosis, Alaska Native people, survivors still receiving or who had recently received care, and people who had to travel 50+ miles for most of their care had significantly greater unmet needs than their comparison groups. Conclusion This assessment provided some of the first information regarding the needs of Alaska’s cancer survivors. These results will be used by Alaska Cancer Partnership members across the state to inform healthcare delivery, programs, and public health messaging to support survivors.

Comparing COVID-19 Response Behaviors between a Cancer Patient Sample and a Population-Based Cancer-Free Sample in a Rural Midwestern State

“…The surveys were specifically designed for comparability across respondent samples, and the use of a stratified random sample increased the ability to generalize results from our population-based sample. Additionally, the 40% response to our general population survey was high compared to other mailed/online population-based surveys during COVID-19 [37, 38]. However, this study also had limitations that should be considered in interpretation of results.…”