Time intervals and patient-level factors in oral cancer diagnostic pathways: An application of the WHO framework in India

• Published in: Cancer epidemiology 2022-12, Vol.81, p.102283, Article 102283
• Main Authors: Kuriakose, Steena, Krishnamurthy, Arvind, Vinutha, RS, Ramshankar, Vijayalakshmi, Sekhar, Shobana, Walia, Gagandeep Kaur, Gupta, Ruby, Aggarwal, Aastha, Singh, Ranjana, Rajan, Sheril, Kondal, Dimple, Grover, Surbhi, Prabhakaran, D., Dhillon, Preet K., Shridhar, Krithiga, Goodman, Michael
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Alternative medicine; Cancer; Data collection; Diagnosis; Diagnostic pathway; Employment; Epidemiology; Fear & phobias; Health care; Health care access; Health care facilities; Hospitals; India; Knowledge; Lifestyles; Likert scale; Medical diagnosis; Medical records; Mouth; Oral cancer; Patients; Primary care; Public sector; Pull-strategy; Questionnaires; Regression analysis; Risk analysis; Risk factors; Socioeconomic factors; Statistical analysis; Time Intervals; Tongue
• ISSN: 1877-7821; 1877-783X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2022.102283

Oral cancer, a leading cancer-site in India, is often detected at advanced stages. We evaluated the time intervals from first symptom to help-seeking and diagnosis among oral cancer patients. In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 226 consecutive oral cancer patients (mean age ( ± SD) 51.9 years ( ± 10.9); 81.9% men; 70.3% advanced stage) registered for diagnosis and treatment, between 2019 and 2021 at a cancer care centre in South India. We used WHO framework and previously standardized tools to record time intervals (appraisal, help-seeking and diagnostic) and baseline characteristics. We utilized multivariable logistic regression models to test the associations between ‘prolonged (i.e., over 1 month) time intervals’) and patient-level factors to estimate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Over a half of patients presented with prolonged appraisal (60%) and help-seeking intervals (57%), and a third (34%) reported prolonged diagnostic interval. Patients with no formal education, no routine healthcare visits, no self-reported risk factors, and those who did not perceive initial symptoms to be serious were 2–4 times more likely to have prolonged appraisal and help-seeking than the rest. High travel costs and self-decision for visiting healthcare facility prolonged help-seeking. Diagnostic interval was prolonged only among women OR= 2.7 (95% CI: 1.2–6.1)) and in patients whose first doctor’s opinion was ‘nothing to worry’ OR (=7.3 (95% CI: 2.6–20.5)). ‘Correct knowledge of cancer’ shortened appraisal and help-seeking intervals and ‘incorrect knowledge and negative beliefs’ prolonged diagnostic interval. Our findings highlight that interventions targeting sociocultural and economic determinants, symptom awareness, sensitizing persons at risk (especially women) and primary care providers might reduce overall time to diagnosis. Further, patients without any known risk factors for oral cancer might be at-risk for prolonged appraisal interval. These might help inform ‘pull’ strategies for cancer control in India and similar settings. •Evaluation of the time intervals from first symptom to help-seeking and diagnosis among oral cancer patients.•Inequitable access to cancer care at the health system level (‘push’ strategy)•The ‘pull’ strategy involves psychological (fear, beliefs & stigma) and knowledge factors.•Appraisal, Help seeking and Diagnostic Time Intervals using WHO framework and previously standardized tools