Abstract
Objective To describe the health system, socioeconomic and clinical factors that influence access to and outcomes of care for prostate cancer (PC) in Uganda.
Design Qualitative Delphi technique
Setting Government and private-not-for-profit hospitals
Methods We applied a two-stage modified Delphi technique to identify the consensus view across cancer experts. In the first round, experts received a questionnaire containing 22 statements drawn from a systematic review of the literature focusing on identifying the reason for the delay in accessing cancer care. Round 2 comprised 18 statements considered the greatest priority from round 1.
Results We found that the top five research priority areas arise from challenges including: (i) lack of Diagnostic services - Ultrasound, laboratory tests, and biopsy facilities; (ii) High costs of services e.g., surgery, radiotherapy, hormone therapy are unaffordable to most patients, (iii) Lack of critical surgical supplies and essential/critical medicines, (iv) Lack of awareness of cancer as a disease and low recognition of symptoms, (v) Low Healthcare literacy. The lack of critical surgical supplies, high costs of diagnostic investigations and treatments were ranked highest in order of importance in round one. Round two of the survey also revealed lack of diagnostic services, unavailability of critical medicines, lack of radiotherapy options, high costs of treatments and lack of critical surgical supplies as the top priorities.
Conclusion These research priority areas ought to be addressed in future research to improve prompt prostate cancer diagnosis and care in Uganda. There is need to improve the supply of high-quality affordable anticancer medicines provided timely to prostate cancer patients so as to improve the survivorship from the cancer.
Strengths and limitations of this study
This is a novel Delphi study exploring research priorities for prostate cancer research in Uganda from various stakeholders in cancer care.
The study was informed by a recent systematic review which provided insight into the statements explored in the Delphi technique.
Participants were recruited from various clinical, government aided and private settings and geographical locations giving representativeness of the participants.
A limitation to this study was the low response rates in round 1 and round 2 as most stakeholders were not familiar with the Delphi technique, or how it works.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The study was supported by funding from Wellcome Institutional Strategic Support Fund grant no. 204928/Z/16/Z through the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was obtained from the Uganda Virus Research Institute Research Ethics Committee (UVRI-REC) Ref: GC/127/21/09/859 and the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (UNCST) Ref: HS1790ES and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Ref: 26672
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors