Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 May 21;33(6):490.
doi: 10.1007/s00520-025-09533-3.

"It really takes a village": perspectives on multi-level barriers to endometrial cancer care for rural patients

Affiliations

"It really takes a village": perspectives on multi-level barriers to endometrial cancer care for rural patients

Brianna D Taffe et al. Support Care Cancer. .

Abstract

Purpose: While it is established that rural cancer patients face multi-level barriers to high-quality treatment, the interconnections between these barriers and how they drive rural cancer disparities is not well-understood. Therefore, our objective was to better understand the interconnections between barriers to high-quality treatment faced by rural endometrial cancer (EC) patients.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 32 clinicians and healthcare personnel from three large, geographically diverse, rural-serving, integrated healthcare systems in North Carolina. A semi-structured interview guide was developed to examine barriers to high-quality treatment for rural EC patients. Initial codes were derived from a multi-level conceptual framework of rural cancer control, and transcribed interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results: We identified three domains of interconnected barriers. First, travel distance, the most frequently noted barrier, amplified financial barriers and caregiver burden. While gynecologic oncologists could reduce travel burden by referring patients to nearby treatment facilities, provider participants expressed mixed opinions regarding the quality of care received at local facilities. Second, limited health literacy among rural patients often led to challenges in patient-provider communication, including challenges with care-related decision making and comprehension of diagnosis and treatment goals. Finally, supportive care and financial resources were often concentrated at large, urban facilities and not accessible to rural patients. However, even these large facilities lack established systems or standardized processes for supporting the most vulnerable patients.

Conclusion: To achieve equitable access to care and outcomes among EC patients, those living in rural areas may require more targeted, intensive outreach, support, and resources.

Keywords: Access to care; Endometrial cancer; High-quality care; Multi-level barriers; Rural cancer care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Conflict of interest: LPS has received salary support paid to her institution for unrelated work from AstraZeneca. SBW has received salary support paid to her institution for unrelated work from Pfizer Foundation/NCCN and AstraZeneca.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Interconnectivity of Multi-level Barriers for Rural Patients with Endometrial Cancer.
The shaded boxes represent different levels of the socio-ecological model and are divided into the three key domains of multi-level barriers. The arrows demonstrate that barriers were often dependent on, or connected to, one another across multiple levels and domains. For example, in Domain 2, patients with low-health literacy (a patient-level barrier) often experienced challenges with healthcare decision making and communication with providers (a provider-level barrier). Additionally, patients with low-health literacy (Domain 2) were disproportionately affected by barriers from Domain 3, such as non-standardized and inequitable pathways to accessing supportive care resources (a clinic-level barrier).

Similar articles

References

    1. Weaver SJ, Blake KD, Vanderpool RC, Gardner B, Croyle RT, Srinivasan S. Advancing rural cancer control research: national cancer institute efforts to identify gaps and opportunities. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention [Internet]. 2020. Aug 1 [cited 2024 Jan 29];29(8):1515–8. Available from: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-20-0453 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zahnd WE, Hyon KS, Diaz-Sylvester P, Izadi SR, Colditz GA, Brard L. Rural–urban differences in surgical treatment, regional lymph node examination, and survival in endometrial cancer patients. Cancer Causes Control [Internet]. 2018. Feb 1 [cited 2024 Jan 29];29(2):221. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC6311991/ - PMC - PubMed
    1. Henley SJ, Jemal A. Rural cancer control: Bridging the chasm in geographic health inequity. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev [Internet]. 2018. Nov 1 [cited 2021 Nov 16];27(11):1248. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC7076627/ - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bhatia S, Landier W, Paskett ED, Peters KB, Merrill JK, Phillips J, et al. Rural-Urban Disparities in Cancer Outcomes: Opportunities for Future Research. J Natl Cancer Inst [Internet]. 2022. Jul 1 [cited 2024 Jan 29];114(7):940–52. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35148389/ - PMC - PubMed
    1. Minig L, Padilla-Iserte P, Zorrero C. The Relevance of Gynecologic Oncologists to Provide High-Quality of Care to Women with Gynecological Cancer. Front Oncol [Internet]. 2016. [cited 2024 Feb 4];5(JAN). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26835417/ - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources