Health-Promoting Behaviours following Primary Treatment for Cancer : A Rural-Urban Comparison from a Cross-Sectional Study
AIM: To compare health-promoting behaviours among rural and urban residents following primary treatment for cancer.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey collecting demographic variables and data pertaining to health-promoting behaviours, documented using the 52-item Health Promotion Lifestyle Profile II (HPLP-II) measure, which is categorised into six subscales: (1) health responsibility, (2) spiritual growth, (3) physical activity, (4) interpersonal relations, (5) nutrition, and (6) stress management. Residence was defined using the U.K. Office for National Statistics RUC 2011 Rural Urban Classifications. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Decile was used to measure deprivation. Quantitative data were analysed using independent samples t-test and multiple linear regression. Qualitative data from open-ended questions were analysed thematically.
RESULTS: In total, 227 participants with a range of cancer types completed the questionnaire. Fifty-three percent were residents in urban areas and forty-five percent in rural areas. Rural participants scored significantly higher on health responsibility (p = 0.001), nutrition (p = 0.001), spiritual growth (p = 0.004), and interpersonal relationships (p = 0.001), as well as on the overall HPLP-II (p = 0.001). When controlling for deprivation, age, marital status, and education, rural-urban residence was a significant predictor of exhibiting health-promoting behaviours. A central theme from the qualitative data was the concept of "moving on" from cancer following treatment, by making adjustments to physical, social, psychological, spiritual, and emotional wellbeing.
CONCLUSIONS: This research revealed, for the first time, differences in health-promoting behaviours among rural and urban U.K. populations who have completed primary cancer treatment. Rural residence can provide a positive environment for engaging with health-promoting behaviours following a cancer diagnosis and treatment.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:30 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) - 30(2023), 2 vom: 25. Jan., Seite 1585-1597 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Nelson, David [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Cancer survivorship |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 28.02.2023 Date Revised 21.03.2023 published: Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.3390/curroncol30020122 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM353322962 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM353322962 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226055728.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/curroncol30020122 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1177.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM353322962 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)36826083 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Nelson, David |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Health-Promoting Behaviours following Primary Treatment for Cancer |b A Rural-Urban Comparison from a Cross-Sectional Study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 28.02.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 21.03.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a AIM: To compare health-promoting behaviours among rural and urban residents following primary treatment for cancer | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: A cross-sectional survey collecting demographic variables and data pertaining to health-promoting behaviours, documented using the 52-item Health Promotion Lifestyle Profile II (HPLP-II) measure, which is categorised into six subscales: (1) health responsibility, (2) spiritual growth, (3) physical activity, (4) interpersonal relations, (5) nutrition, and (6) stress management. Residence was defined using the U.K. Office for National Statistics RUC 2011 Rural Urban Classifications. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Decile was used to measure deprivation. Quantitative data were analysed using independent samples t-test and multiple linear regression. Qualitative data from open-ended questions were analysed thematically | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: In total, 227 participants with a range of cancer types completed the questionnaire. Fifty-three percent were residents in urban areas and forty-five percent in rural areas. Rural participants scored significantly higher on health responsibility (p = 0.001), nutrition (p = 0.001), spiritual growth (p = 0.004), and interpersonal relationships (p = 0.001), as well as on the overall HPLP-II (p = 0.001). When controlling for deprivation, age, marital status, and education, rural-urban residence was a significant predictor of exhibiting health-promoting behaviours. A central theme from the qualitative data was the concept of "moving on" from cancer following treatment, by making adjustments to physical, social, psychological, spiritual, and emotional wellbeing | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: This research revealed, for the first time, differences in health-promoting behaviours among rural and urban U.K. populations who have completed primary cancer treatment. Rural residence can provide a positive environment for engaging with health-promoting behaviours following a cancer diagnosis and treatment | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a United Kingdom | |
| 650 | 4 | |a cancer survivorship | |
| 650 | 4 | |a health behaviours | |
| 650 | 4 | |a health promotion | |
| 650 | 4 | |a living with cancer | |
| 650 | 4 | |a oncology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a rural health | |
| 650 | 4 | |a rural–urban | |
| 650 | 4 | |a urban health | |
| 700 | 1 | |a McGonagle, Ian |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jackson, Christine |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Tsuro, Trish |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Scott, Emily |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gussy, Mark |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kane, Ros |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) |d 1998 |g 30(2023), 2 vom: 25. Jan., Seite 1585-1597 |w (DE-627)NLM09444482X |x 1718-7729 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:30 |g year:2023 |g number:2 |g day:25 |g month:01 |g pages:1585-1597 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol30020122 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 30 |j 2023 |e 2 |b 25 |c 01 |h 1585-1597 | ||