Dataset Information

Factors Associated With State-Specific Medicaid Expansion and Receipt of Autologous Breast Reconstruction Among Patients Undergoing Mastectomy.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Despite demonstrated psychosocial benefits, autologous breast reconstruction remains underutilized. An analysis of the association between Medicaid expansion and autologous breast reconstruction has yet to be performed.

Objective

To compare autologous breast reconstruction rates and determine the association between Medicaid expansion and breast reconstruction.

Design, setting, and participants

A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed using the State Inpatient Database from January 1, 2012, through September 30, 2015, and included 51 340 patients. Patients were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes for breast cancer, mastectomy, and autologous breast reconstruction. Data from states that expanded Medicaid (New Jersey, New York, and Washington) were compared with states that did not expand Medicaid (Florida, North Carolina, and Wisconsin). Data were analyzed from June 1, 2020, through February 28, 2021.

Exposures

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion was implemented in 2014; the preexpansion period ranged from 2012 to 2013 (2 years), whereas the postexpansion period ranged from 2014 to 2015 quarter 3 (1.75 years).

Main outcomes and measures

Primary outcomes included use of autologous breast reconstruction before and after expansion. Independent covariates included patient demographics, comorbidities, and state of residence.

Results

Among 45 850 patients who underwent mastectomy and 9215 patients who received autologous breast reconstruction, 36 777 (67%) were White and 32 205 (59%) had private insurance. The use of immediate or delayed autologous reconstruction increased from 18.1% (4951 of 27 290) to 23.0% (4264 of 18 560) throughout the study period. Compared with 2012, the odds of reconstruction were 64% higher in 2015 (odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.48-1.80; P < .001). African American (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.33-1.55; P < .001) and Hispanic (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.31-1.60; P < .001) patients had higher odds of reconstruction compared with White patients regardless of state of residence. However, Medicaid expansion was associated with a 28% decrease in the odds of reconstruction (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.87; P < .001) for African American patients, a 40% decrease (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.50-0.74; P < .001) for Hispanic patients, and 20% decrease (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67-0.96; P = .01) for patients with Asian, Native American, or other minority race/ethnicity. Medicaid expansion was not associated with changes in the odds of reconstruction for White patients.

Conclusions and relevance

In this cross-sectional study, although the odds of receiving autologous breast reconstruction increased annually, Medicaid expansion was associated with decreased odds of reconstruction for African American patients, Hispanic patients, and other patients of color.

SUBMITTER: Huynh KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8335577 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) is increasingly being used in patients with breast cancer, and evidence-based reports related to its independent effects on morbidity after mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction are limited.To determine the effect of NC on 30-day postoperative morbidity in women undergoing mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction.All women undergoing mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2011, at university and private hospitals internationally were analyzed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2005-2011 databases. Patients who received NC were compared with those without a history of NC to estimate the relative odds of 30-day postoperative overall, systemic, and surgical site morbidity using model-wise multivariable logistic regression.Neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Thirty-day postoperative morbidity (overall, systemic, and surgical site).Of 85,851 women, 66,593 (77.6%) underwent mastectomy without breast reconstruction, with 2876 (4.3%) receiving NC; 7893 patients were excluded because of missing exposure data. The immediate breast reconstruction population included 19,258 patients (22.4%), with 820 (4.3%) receiving NC. After univariable analysis, NC was associated with a 20% lower odds of overall morbidity in the group undergoing mastectomy without breast reconstruction (odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.91) but had no significant effect in the immediate breast reconstruction group (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.23). After adjustment for confounding, NC was independently associated with lower overall morbidity in the group undergoing mastectomy without breast reconstruction (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51-0.73) and the immediate tissue expander reconstruction subgroup (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.84). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with decreased odds of systemic morbidity in 4 different populations: complete sample (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.49-0.71), mastectomy without breast reconstruction (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.72), any immediate breast reconstruction (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.37-0.88), and the tissue expander subgroup (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.23-0.72).Our study supports the safety of NC in women undergoing mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with lower overall morbidity in the patients undergoing mastectomy without breast reconstruction and in those undergoing tissue expander breast reconstruction. In addition, the odds of systemic morbidity were decreased in patients undergoing mastectomy with and without immediate breast reconstruction. The mechanisms behind the protective association of NC remain unknown and warrant further investigation.

Project description:IntroductionUse of autologous fat grafting (AFG) for breast reconstructive surgery is gaining acceptance, but concerns regarding its efficacy and safety remain. We present a protocol for a systematic review that aims to update the findings since our previous systematic review on a number of outcomes of AFG.MethodsThe systematic review has been registered a priori (UIN: reviewregistry308). All study designs, including randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-controlled studies and case reports/series, reporting original data, on women undergoing AFG for breast reconstruction following mastectomy or breast conserving surgery, will be included. Six categorical outcomes will be assessed: oncological; clinical; aesthetic/functional; patient-reported; process; and radiological.The search strategy will be devised to investigate 'fat grafting and breast reconstruction'. Electronic databases will be searched, 01 April 2014 to 21 August 2017: PubMed, MEDLINE®, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, PsychINFO, SciELO, The Cochrane Library, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect (DARE), the Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, the NHS Economic Evaluation Databases and Cochrane Groups, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials Database, the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, UpToDate.com, NHS Evidence and the York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Grey literature will be searched. Two trained, independent teams will screen all titles and abstracts, and relevant full texts, for eligibility. Data will be extracted under standardised extraction fields into a preformatted database.Ethics and disseminationThe systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international meetings within fields of plastic, reconstructive and aesthetic surgery, and surgical oncology. The work will be disseminated electronically and in print. Brief reports of the review and findings will be disseminated to interested parties through email and direct communication. The review aims to guide healthcare practice and policy.

Project description:PurposeThe goal of this study was to explore the perspectives and practice of radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer patients who have had breast reconstruction.MethodsIn 2010, an original electronic survey was sent to all physician members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Research Institute-Breast Cancer Studies Group in the United Kingdom, Thai Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Swiss Society of Radiation Oncology, and Turkish Radiation Oncology Society. We identified factors associated with radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer patients with reconstruction performed prior to radiation and obtained information regarding radiation management of the breast reconstruction.Results358 radiation oncologists responded, and 60% of the physicians were from the United States. While 64% of participants agree or strongly agree that breast image affects a woman's quality of life during radiation, 57% feel that reconstruction challenges their ability to deliver effective breast radiation. Compared with other countries, treatment within the United States was associated with a high reconstruction rate (>/= 50% of mastectomy patients) prior to radiation (p < 0.05). Delayed-immediate reconstruction with a temporary tissue expander was more common in the United States than in other countries (52% vs. 23%, p = 0.01). Among physicians who treat patients with tissue expanders, the majority (60%) prefer a moderately inflated implant with 150-250 cc of fluid rather than a completely deflated (13%) or inflated expander (28%) during radiation. Among radiation oncologists who treat reconstructions, 49% never use bolus and 40% never boost a breast reconstruction. United States physicians were more likely than physicians from other countries to boost or bolus the reconstruction irrespective of the type of reconstruction seen in their clinic patients (p < 0.01).ConclusionsGreat variation in practice is evident from our study of radiation treatment for breast cancer patients with reconstruction. Further research on the impact and delivery of radiation to a reconstructed breast may validate some of the observed practices, highlight the variability in treatment practice, and help create a treatment consensus.