Dataset Information

Do cancer survivors change their prescription drug use for financial reasons? Findings from a nationally representative sample in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is limited evidence from nationally representative samples about changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons among cancer survivors in the United States.

Methods

The 2011 to 2014 National Health Interview Survey was used to identify adults who reported ever having been told they had cancer (cancer survivors; n = 8931) and individuals without a cancer history (n = 126,287). Measures of changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons included: 1) skipping medication doses, 2) taking less medicine, 3) delaying filling a prescription, 4) asking a doctor for lower cost medication, 5) buying prescription drugs from another country, and 6) using alternative therapies. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were controlled for demographic characteristics, number of comorbid conditions, interactions between cancer history and number of comorbid conditions, and health insurance coverage. Main analyses were stratified by age (nonelderly, ages 18-64 years; elderly, ages ≥65 years) and time since diagnosis (recently diagnosed, <2 years; previously diagnosed, ≥2 years).

Results

Among nonelderly individuals, both recently diagnosed (31.6%) and previously diagnosed (27.9%) cancer survivors were more likely to report any change in prescription drug use for financial reasons than those without a cancer history (21.4%), with the excess percentage changes for individual measures ranging from 3.5% to 9.9% among previously diagnosed survivors and from 2.6% to 2.7% among recently diagnosed survivors (P < .01). Elderly cancer survivors and those without a cancer history had comparable rates of changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons.

Conclusions

Nonelderly cancer survivors are particularly vulnerable to changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons, suggesting that targeted efforts are needed. Cancer 2017;123:1453-1463. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

SUBMITTER: Zheng Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6080209 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Financial hardship (FH), defined as adverse patient effects due to cancer costs, is experienced by approximately half of individuals diagnosed with cancer. Many individuals diagnosed with cancer also experience disruptions with their employment. This study examines associations of employment disruptions and FH among a nationally representative sample of individuals diagnosed with cancer in the United States. We utilized 2016/2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Experiences with Cancer data from individuals who worked for pay following cancer diagnosis. Employment disruption included taking extended paid time off work; switching to part-time/less demanding jobs; and/or retiring early due to cancer diagnosis/treatment. FH domains included: material (e.g., borrowing money/financial sacrifices); psychologic (e.g., worrying about medical bills/income); and behavioral (delaying/forgoing healthcare services because of cost). Multivariable logistic regression analyses determined associations of employment disruption and FH. Among 732 individuals with a cancer history, 47.4% experienced employment disruptions; 55.9% experienced any FH. Any FH was significantly more common among individuals with versus without employment disruptions across multiple measures and domains (68.7% vs. 44.5%; P value of difference <0.0001). Individuals with employment disruptions were more likely to have any FH [OR, 2.38; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.62-3.52] and more FHs (OR, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.96-3.89]. This study highlights that employment disruptions are common and significantly associated with multiple domains of FH among individuals with a cancer history. Employer workplace accommodation, physician discussions regarding potential impacts of cancer care on employment, and other policies to minimize employment disruptions among individuals diagnosed with cancer may reduce FH in this vulnerable population.SignificanceIndividuals diagnosed with cancer may have employment disruptions; they may also develop FHs. People with cancer who have employment changes are more likely to also have FHs. Physicians and employers can help individuals with cancer through advancing planning, workplace assistance, and improved medical leave and insurance policies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Recent research suggests that mental health problems in spouses of cancer survivors are associated with worse mental health in the survivors themselves. Adequately treating spousal mental health problems therefore represents an opportunity to improve outcomes for both cancer survivors and their co-surviving family members. OBJECTIVE:Using nationally representative data, this study sought to determine how depression treatment differs between spouses of cancer survivors with depression compared to the general married population and assess rural/urban disparities in treatment. DESIGN:The design of the study is cross sectional. PARTICIPANTS:Data are from the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey, a household-based survey of US adults; we concatenated data from 2004 to 2013. We identified spouses of cancer survivors (n =?225) and a comparison group of married adults (n =?3678). MAIN MEASURES:Key measures included depression, guideline concordance of depression treatment (at least four prescriptions related to depression treatment, or at least eight psychotherapy or counseling visits), and sociodemographic characteristics. Logistic regressions evaluated the association between whether their spouse had cancer and receipt of guideline-concordant treatment, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics; secondary analyses included rurality as a moderator. Analyses were weighted to account for the complex sampling design. KEY RESULTS:Spouses of cancer survivors were 33% less likely to receive guideline-concordant depression treatment than comparison spouses (odds ratio (OR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.99), controlling for covariates. Rural-urban disparities were observed: rural spouses of cancer survivors were 72% less likely to receive guideline-concordant treatment (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11-0.68) than rural comparison spouses. Spouses of cancer survivors and comparison spouses were no different in their receipt of any treatment versus no treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Spouses of cancer survivors with depression may be at increased risk of non-guideline-concordant depression treatment, particularly in rural areas. The findings have implications for identifying and educating individuals with depression in primary care and other clinical areas.