Understanding Reasons for Cancer Disparities in Italy: A Qualitative Study of Barriers and Needs of Cancer Patients and Healthcare Providers.

BACKGROUND: The second leading cause of death in Italy is cancer. Substantial disparities persist in the level of care and outcomes for cancer patients across various communities, hospitals, and regions in Italy. While substantial progress has been made in medical research and treatment options, these advancements tend to disproportionately benefit the wealthier, better-educated, and more privileged areas and portions of the population. Therefore, the primary aim of the current study is to explore possible reasons for inequalities in access to and utilisation of care from the perspective of cancer patients, who are recipients of these treatments, and healthcare providers, who are responsible for their administration. METHODS: After being recruited through social media platforms, patients' organisations, and hospital websites, cancer patients (n = 22) and healthcare providers (n = 16) from various Italian regions participated in online focus group discussions on disparities in access to and provision of care. Video and audio recordings of the interviews were analysed using Thematic analysis. RESULTS: Among cancer patients, 7 themes were identified, while 6 themes emerged from the healthcare providers highlighting encountered barriers and unmet needs in cancer care. Most of these emerging themes are common to both groups, such as geographical disparities, information deficiencies, and the importance of psycho-oncological support. However, several themes are specific to each group, for instance, cancer patients highlight the financial burden and the poor interactions with healthcare providers, while healthcare providers emphasise the necessity of establishing a stronger specialists' network and integrating clinical practice and research. CONCLUSION: Current findings reveal persistent challenges in cancer care, including long waiting lists and regional disparities, highlighting the need for inclusive healthcare strategies. The value of psycho-oncological support is underscored, as well as the potential of the Internet's use for informational needs, emphasising the imperative for improved awareness and communication to overcome disparities in cancer care.

When listening to rain sounds boosts arithmetic ability.

Studies in the literature have provided conflicting evidence about the effects of background noise or music on concurrent cognitive tasks. Some studies have shown a detrimental effect, while others have shown a beneficial effect of background auditory stimuli. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of agitating, happy or touching music, as opposed to environmental sounds or silence, on the ability of non-musician subjects to perform arithmetic operations. Fifty university students (25 women and 25 men, 25 introverts and 25 extroverts) volunteered for the study. The participants were administered 180 easy or difficult arithmetic operations (division, multiplication, subtraction and addition) while listening to heavy rain sounds, silence or classical music. Silence was detrimental when participants were faced with difficult arithmetic operations, as it was associated with significantly worse accuracy and slower RTs than music or rain sound conditions. This finding suggests that the benefit of background stimulation was not music-specific but possibly due to an enhanced cerebral alertness level induced by the auditory stimulation. Introverts were always faster than extroverts in solving mathematical problems, except when the latter performed calculations accompanied by the sound of heavy rain, a condition that made them as fast as introverts. While the background auditory stimuli had no effect on the arithmetic ability of either group in the easy condition, it strongly affected extroverts in the difficult condition, with RTs being faster during agitating or joyful music as well as rain sounds, compared to the silent condition. For introverts, agitating music was associated with faster response times than the silent condition. This group difference may be explained on the basis of the notion that introverts have a generally higher arousal level compared to extroverts and would therefore benefit less from the background auditory stimuli.