Dataset Information

Patient, Hospital, and Geographic Disparities in Laparoscopic Surgery Use Among Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Patients With Colon Cancer.

ABSTRACT: Surgical resection is the primary treatment for colon cancer, but use of laparoscopic approaches varies widely despite demonstrated short- and long-term benefits.The purpose of this study was to identify characteristics associated with laparoscopic colon cancer resection and to quantify variation based on patient, hospital, and geographic characteristics.Bayesian cross-classified, multilevel logistic models calculated adjusted ORs and CIs for patient, surgeon, hospital, and geographic characteristics and unexplained variability (predicted vs. observed values) using adjusted median odds ratios for hospitals and counties.The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare claims database (2008-2011) supplemented with county-level American Community Survey (2008-2012) demographic data was used.A total of 10,618 patients ?66 years old who underwent colon cancer resection were included.Nonurgent/nonemergent resections for colon cancer patients ?66 years old were classified as laparoscopic or open procedures.Patients resided in 579 counties and used 950 hospitals; 47% of patients underwent laparoscopic surgery. Medicare/Medicaid dual enrollment, age ?85 years, and higher tumor stage and grade were negatively associated with laparoscopic surgery receipt; proximal tumors and increasing hospital size and surgeon caseload were positively associated. Significant unexplained variability at the hospital (adjusted median OR = 3.31; p < 0.001) and county levels (adjusted median OR = 1.28; p < 0.05) remained after adjustment.This was an observational study lacking generalizability to younger patients without Medicare or those with Health Maintenance Organization coverage and data set did not reflect national hospital studies or hospital volume. In addition, we were unable to account for specific types of comorbidities, such as obesity, and had broad categories for surgeon caseload.Determining sources of hospital-level variation among poor insured patients may help increase laparoscopic resection to maximize health outcomes and reduce cost. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A363.

SUBMITTER: Ratnapradipa KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5643006 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient, Hospital, and Geographic Disparities in Laparoscopic Surgery Use Among Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Patients With Colon Cancer.

Ratnapradipa Kendra L KL Lian Min M Jeffe Donna B DB Davidson Nicholas O NO Eberth Jan M JM Pruitt Sandi L SL Schootman Mario M

Diseases of the colon and rectum 20170901 9

<h4>Background</h4>Surgical resection is the primary treatment for colon cancer, but use of laparoscopic approaches varies widely despite demonstrated short- and long-term benefits.<h4>Objective</h4>The purpose of this study was to identify characteristics associated with laparoscopic colon cancer resection and to quantify variation based on patient, hospital, and geographic characteristics.<h4>Design</h4>Bayesian cross-classified, multilevel logistic models calculated adjusted ORs and CIs for p ...[more]

PMID: 28796728

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere are prominent geographic disparities in the life expectancy (LE) of older US adults between the states with the highest (leading states) and lowest (lagging states) LE and their causes remain poorly understood. Heart failure (HF) has been proposed as a major contributor to these disparities. This study aims to investigate geographic disparities in HF outcomes between the leading and lagging states.MethodsThe study was a secondary data analysis of HF outcomes in older US adults aged 65+, using Center for Disease Control and Prevention sponsored Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) database and a nationally representative 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries over 2000-2017. Empiric estimates of death certificate-based mortality from HF as underlying cause of death (CBM-UCD)/multiple cause of death (CBM-MCD); HF incidence-based mortality (IBM); HF incidence, prevalence, and survival were compared between the leading and lagging states. Cox regression was used to investigate the effect of residence in the lagging states on HF incidence and survival.ResultsBetween 2000 and 2017, HF mortality rates (per 100,000) were higher in the lagging states (CBM-UCD: 188.5-248.6; CBM-MCD: 749.4-965.9; IBM: 2656.0-2978.4) than that in the leading states (CBM-UCD: 79.4-95.6; CBM-MCD: 441.4-574.1; IBM: 1839.5-2138.1). Compared to their leading counterparts, lagging states had higher HF incidence (2.9-3.9% vs. 2.2-2.9%), prevalence (15.6-17.2% vs. 11.3-13.0%), and pre-existing prevalence at age 65 (5.3-7.3% vs. 2.8-4.1%). The most recent rates of one- (77.1% vs. 80.4%), three- (59.0% vs. 60.7%) and five-year (45.8% vs. 49.8%) survival were lower in the lagging states. A greater risk of HF incidence (Adjusted Hazards Ratio, AHR [95%CI]: 1.29 [1.29-1.30]) and death after HF diagnosis (AHR: 1.12 [1.11-1.13]) was observed for populations in the lagging states. The study also observed recent increases in CBMs and HF incidence, and declines in HF prevalence, prevalence at age 65 and survival with a decade-long plateau stage in IBM in both leading and lagging states.ConclusionThere are substantial geographic disparities in HF mortality, incidence, prevalence, and survival across the U.S.: HF incidence, prevalence at age 65 (age of Medicare enrollment), and survival of patients with HF contributed most to these disparities. The geographic disparities and the recent increase in incidence and decline in survival underscore the importance of HF prevention strategies.

Project description:Background: There are substantial geographic disparities in the life expectancy (LE) across the U.S. with myocardial infarction (MI) contributing significantly to the differences between the states with highest (leading) and lowest (lagging) LE. This study aimed to systematically investigate the epidemiology of geographic disparities in MI among older adults. Methods: Data on MI outcomes among adults aged 65+ were derived from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research database and a 5% sample of Medicare Beneficiaries for 2000-2017. Death certificate-based mortality from MI as underlying/multiple cause of death (CBM-UCD/CBM-MCD), incidence-based mortality (IBM), incidence, prevalence, prevalence at age 65, and 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival, and remaining LE at age 65 were estimated and compared between the leading and lagging states. Cox model was used to investigate the effect of residence in the lagging states on MI incidence and survival. Results: Between 2000 and 2017, MI mortality was higher in the lagging than in the leading states (per 100,000, CBM-UCD: 236.7-583.7 vs. 128.2-357.6, CBM-MCD: 322.7-707.7 vs. 182.4-437.7, IBM: 1330.5-1518.9 vs. 1003.3-1197.0). Compared to the leading states, lagging states had higher MI incidence (1.1-2.0% vs. 0.9-1.8%), prevalence (10.2-13.1% vs. 8.3-11.9%), pre-existing prevalence (2.5-5.1% vs. 1.4-3.6%), and lower survival (70.4 vs. 77.2% for 1-year, 63.2 vs. 67.2% for 3-year, and 52.1 vs. 58.7% for 5-year), and lower remaining LE at age 65 among MI patients (years, 8.8-10.9 vs. 9.9-12.8). Cox model results showed that the lagging states had greater risk of MI incidence [Adjusted hazards ratio, AHR (95% Confidence Interval, CI): 1.18 (1.16, 1.19)] and death after MI diagnosis [1.22 (1.21, 1.24)]. Study results also showed alarming declines in survival and remaining LE at age 65 among MI patients. Conclusion: There are substantial geographic disparities in MI outcomes, with lagging states having higher MI mortality, incidence, and prevalence, lower survival and remaining LE at age 65. Disparities in MI mortality in a great extent could be due to between-the-state differences in MI incidence, prevalence at age 65 and survival. Observed declines in survival and remaining LE require an urgent analysis of contributing factors that must be addressed.

Project description:ImportanceFollowing the US Food and Drug Administration approval for laparoscopic gastric band surgery in 2001, as many as 96 000 devices have been placed annually. The reported rates of reoperation range from 4% to 60% in short-term studies; however, to our knowledge, few long-term population-level data on outcomes or expenditures are known.ObjectiveTo describe the rate of device-related reoperations occurring after laparoscopic gastric band surgery as well as the associated payments in a longitudinal national cohort.Design, settings, and participantsThis retrospective review of 25 042 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent gastric band placement between 2006 and 2013 identifies gastric band-related reoperations, including device removal, device replacement, or revision to a different bariatric procedure (eg, a gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy). The rates of reoperation were risk adjusted using a multivariable logistic regression model that included patient age, sex, race/ethnicity, Elixhauser comorbidities, and the year that the operation was performed.Main outcomes and measuresRate of device-related reoperation nationally and across individual hospital referral regions. Thirty-day total episode Medicare payments to hospitals for the index operation and any subsequent reoperations.ResultsOf the 25 042 patients who underwent gastric band placement, 20 687 (82.61%) were white, 18 143 (72.45%) were women, and the mean age was 57.56 years. Patients (mean age, 57.5; 76.2% women) requiring reoperation had lower rates of hypertension (64.9% vs 73.4%; P < .001) and diabetes (40.4% vs 44.6%; P < .001) and were more likely to have their index operation at a for-profit hospital (34.6% vs 22.0%; P < .001). With an average of 4.5-year follow-up, 4636 patients (18.5%) underwent 17 539 reoperations (an average of 3.8 procedures/patient). Hospital referral regions demonstrated a 2.9-fold variation in risk- and reliability-adjusted rates of reoperation (lower quartile average, 13.3%; upper quartile average, 39.1%). During the study period, Medicare paid $470 million for laparoscopic gastric band associated procedures, of which $224 million (47.6%) of the payments were for reoperations. From 2006 to 2013, the proportion of payments from Medicare for reoperations increased from 16.4% to 77.3% of their annual spending on the gastric band device.Conclusions and relevanceAmong Medicare beneficiaries undergoing gastric band surgery, device-related reoperation was common, costly, and varied widely across hospital referral regions. These findings suggest that payers should reconsider their coverage of the gastric band device.

Dataset Information

Patient, Hospital, and Geographic Disparities in Laparoscopic Surgery Use Among Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Patients With Colon Cancer.

Publications

Patient, Hospital, and Geographic Disparities in Laparoscopic Surgery Use Among Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Patients With Colon Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets