Racial/Ethnic Differences in Patients' Selection of Surgeons and Hospitals for Breast Cancer Surgery

Disparities in Healthcare-Seeking Behavior and Decision Preference Among Hispanics: A Comparative Study Across Races/Ethnicities, SES, and Provider Types

Purpose

Hispanics, the largest minority in America, have increased risk of several medical issues and face noteworthy health disparities. This study compares care-seeking behaviors and choice experience among Hispanics, Asians, Blacks, and Whites, considering SES (income, education, and insurance status) and across five healthcare provider (HCP) types. Concurrent analysis provides a comprehensive view of how and where inequity manifests in healthcare.

Methods

A cross-sectional online survey assessed 1485 adults (Hispanic=314, Asian=313, Black=316, White=542, recruited through a panel agency) of the frequency of visiting primary care providers, dentists, optometrists, gynecologists, and specialists for chronic conditions. Participants also rated the importance of self-selecting a HCP and difficulty in finding one.

Results

Whites visited each HCP most regularly. Compared to Asians, more Hispanics saw specialists regularly (45.1% vs 56.5%, p=0.042), and Blacks saw dentists less (47.0% vs 38.3%, p=0.028) and gynecologists more often (21.2% vs 33.1%, p=0.024). No other frequency differences were observed among minorities. Low-income participants across four races saw dentists and gynecologists with comparable infrequency. Hispanics and Asians assigned similarly significantly lower self-choice importance and experienced more difficulty relative to Whites or Blacks. Participants with lower income or education visited HCPs less regularly yet perceived the same choice importance as higher-SES peers (p>0.05). Notably, discrepancies in visit frequency between Whites and minorities were more pronounced in higher-SES than lower-SES group. Differences in experiencing care-seeking difficulty were associated with income (p=0.029) and insurance type (p=0.009) but not education (p>0.05).

Conclusion

Higher income and education increase healthcare utilization; however, racial disparities persist, particularly among higher-SES groups. Despite similarities among minorities, the extent of disparities varied by SES and provider type. The findings help explain evident inequity in healthcare access and health outcomes. Tailored patient education, culturally-specific navigation support, and more inclusive services are needed to address barriers faced by minorities and disadvantaged populations.

Hospital Factors Influencing the Mobility of Patients for Systemic Therapies in Breast and Bowel Cancer in the Metastatic Setting: A National Population-based Evaluation

AIMS

This national study investigated hospital quality and patient factors associated with treatment location for systemic anticancer treatment (SACT) in patients with metastatic cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using linked administrative datasets from the English NHS, we identified all patients diagnosed with metastatic breast and bowel cancer between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018, who subsequently received SACT within 4 months from diagnosis. The extent to which patients bypassed their nearest hospital was investigated using a geographic information system (ArcGIS). Conditional logistic regression models were used to estimate the impact of travel time, hospital quality and patient characteristics on where patients underwent SACT.

RESULTS

541 of 2,364 women (22.9%) diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer, and 2,809 of 10,050 (28.0%) patients diagnosed with metastatic bowel cancer bypassed their nearest hospital providing SACT. There was a strong preference for receiving treatment at hospitals near where patients lived (p < 0.001). However, patients who were younger (p = 0.043 for breast cancer; p < 0.001 for bowel cancer) or from rural areas (p = 0.001 for breast cancer; p < 0.001 for bowel cancer) were more likely to travel to more distant hospitals. Patients diagnosed with rectal cancer were more likely to travel further for SACT than patients with colon cancer (p = 0.002). Patients were more likely to travel to comprehensive cancer centres (p = 0.019 for bowel cancer) and designated Experimental Cancer Medicine Centres (ECMCs) although the latter association was not significant. Patients were less likely to receive SACT in hospitals with the highest readmission rates (p = 0.046 for bowel cancer).

CONCLUSION

Patients with metastatic cancer receiving primary SACT are prepared to travel to alternative more distant hospitals for treatment with a preference for larger comprehensive centres providing multimodal care or hospitals which offer early phase cancer clinical trials.

Association of travel time, patient characteristics, and hospital quality with patient mobility for breast cancer surgery: A national population-based study

BACKGROUND

This national study investigated hospital quality and patient factors associated with treatment location for breast cancer surgery.

METHODS

By using linked administrative data sets from the English National Health Service, the authors identified all women diagnosed between January 2, 2016, and December 31, 2018, who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) or a mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction. The extent to which patients bypassed their nearest hospital was investigated using a geographic information system (ArcGIS). Conditional logistic regressions were used to estimate the impact of travel time, hospital quality, and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

22,622 Of 69,153 patients undergoing BCS, 22,622 (32.7%) bypassed their nearest hospital; and, of 23,536 patients undergoing mastectomy, 7179 (30.5%) bypassed their nearest hospital. Women who were younger, without comorbidities, or from rural areas were more likely to travel to more distant hospitals (p < .05). Patients undergoing BCS (odds ratio [OR], 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-2.50) or mastectomy (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.02) were more likely to be treated at specialist breast reconstruction centers despite not undergoing the procedure. Patients receiving mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction were more likely to travel to hospitals employing surgeons who had a media reputation (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.28-4.52). Patients undergoing BCS were less likely to travel to hospitals with shorter surgical waiting times (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.92). The authors did not observe a significant impact for research activity, hospital quality rating, breast re-excision rates, or the status as a multidisciplinary cancer center.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient choice policies may drive inequalities in the health care system without improving patient outcomes.

Patient Perceptions and Preferences When Choosing a Surgeon: A Cross-Sectional Study, Qassim Region, Saudi Arabia

Background The patient-physician relationship is changing, and patients are taking more responsibility in their decision-making. Many patients use the Internet as an important source of information regarding their health. Physician-rating websites provide essential information about the quality of care from patients' perspectives. However, choosing the appropriate healthcare provider is still complicated for any patient. Many patients find choosing a surgeon stressful because they cannot change the treating surgeon once the surgery is underway. Understanding a patient's preferences in choosing the right surgeon is essential to forming a patient-surgeon relationship and shaping practice. Nevertheless, little is known about the factors influencing patients' choices for elective surgeries in the Qassim region. Objectives This study aims to explore factors and the most common manners patients use to reach their appropriate surgeon in the Qassim Region, Saudi Arabia. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among target people over 18 years old in Qassim Region, Saudi Arabia, using a snowball sample study from October 2022 to February 2023. The data were collected online using Google Forms using a self-administered, valid Arabic questionnaire distributed to respondents via WhatsApp, Twitter, and Telegram. The questionnaire consists of two sections: participants' sociodemographic status, including age, gender, nationality, residence, occupation, and monthly income; and a section to evaluate factors influencing patient decision-making when choosing a surgeon for elective surgery. Results The factors that were significantly associated with elective surgery were: gender of the doctor (adjOR = 1.62, 99% CI: 1.29-2.04); age (adjOR = 1.31, 99% CI: 1.13-1.53); gender of the study patient (adjOR = 1.64, 99% CI: 1.28-2.10); nationality (adjOR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26-0.88); and employment (adjOR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.79-0.99). Conclusions The cultural background in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia plays a significant role in influencing gender in the choice of the surgeon for elective surgery. Recommendations from friends and family members play a less significant role in the choice of the surgeon for elective surgery. Patients in employment and pensioners seem to have a significant preference in the choice of surgeon for elective surgery.

Race, geography, and risk of breast cancer treatment delays: A population-based study 2004-2015

BACKGROUND

Treatment delays affect breast cancer survival and constitute poor-quality care. Black patients experience more treatment delay, but the relationship of geography to these disparities is poorly understood.

METHODS

We studied a population-based, retrospective, observational cohort of patients with breast cancer in North Carolina between 2004 and 2017 from the Cancer Information and Population Health Resource, which links cancer registry and sociodemographic data to multipayer insurance claims. We included patients >18 years with Stage I-III breast cancer who received surgery or chemotherapy as their first treatment. Delay was defined as >60 days from diagnosis to first treatment. Counties were aggregated into nine Area Health Education Center regions. Race was dichotomized as Black versus non-Black.

RESULTS

Among 32,626 patients, 6190 (19.0%) were Black. Black patients were more likely to experience treatment delay >60 days (15.0% of Black vs. 8.0% of non-Black). Using race-stratified modified Poisson regression, age-adjusted relative risk of delay in the highest risk region was approximately twice that in the lowest risk region among Black (relative risk, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.6-2.6) and non-Black patients (relative risk, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.3). Adjustment for clinical and sociodemographic features only slightly attenuated interregion differences. The magnitude of the racial gap in treatment delay varied by region, from 0.0% to 9.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Geographic region was significantly associated with risk of treatment delays for both Black and non-Black patients. The magnitude of racial disparities in treatment delay varied markedly between regions. Future studies should consider both high-risk geographic regions and high-risk patient groups for intervention to prevent delays.

Comparison of Simulated Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer Surgery at the Highest-Performing vs Chosen Local Hospitals

IMPORTANCE

Variation in outcomes across hospitals adversely affects surgical patients. The use of high-quality hospitals varies by population, which may contribute to surgical disparities.

OBJECTIVE

To simulate the implications of data-driven hospital selection for social welfare among patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgery.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This economic evaluation used the hospital inpatient file from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. Surgical outcomes of patients who were treated between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018 (training cohort), were used to estimate hospital performance. Costs and benefits of care at alternative hospitals were assessed in patients who were treated between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019 (testing cohort). The cohorts comprised patients 18 years or older who underwent elective colorectal resection for benign or malignant neoplasms. Data were analyzed from March to October 2022.

EXPOSURES

Using hierarchical logistic regression, we estimated the implications of hospital selection for in-hospital mortality risk in patients in the training cohort. These estimates were applied to patients in the testing cohort using bayesian simulations to compare outcomes at each patient's highest-performing and chosen local hospitals. Analyses were stratified by race and ethnicity to evaluate the potential implications for equity.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the mean patient-level change in social welfare, a composite measure balancing the value of reduced mortality with associated costs of care at higher-performing hospitals.

RESULTS

A total of 21 098 patients (mean [SD] age, 67.3 [12.0] years; 10 782 males [51.1%]; 2232 Black [10.6%] and 18 866 White [89.4%] individuals) who were treated at 178 hospitals were included. A higher-quality local hospital was identified for 3057 of 5000 patients (61.1%) in the testing cohort. Selecting the highest-performing hospital was associated with a 26.5% (95% CI, 24.5%-29.0%) relative reduction and 0.24% (95% CI, 0.23%-0.25%) absolute reduction in mortality risk. A mean amount of $1953 (95% CI, $1744-$2162) was gained in social welfare per patient treated. Simulated reassignment to a higher-quality local hospital was associated with a 23.5% (95% CI, 19.3%-32.9%) relative reduction and 0.26% (95% CI, 0.21%-0.30%) absolute reduction in mortality risk for Black patients, with $2427 (95% CI, $1697-$3158) gained in social welfare.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this economic evaluation, using procedure-specific hospital performance as the primary factor in the selection of a local hospital for colorectal cancer surgery was associated with improved outcomes for both patients and society. Surgical outcomes data can be used to transform care and guide policy in colorectal cancer.

How Referring Providers Choose Specialists for Their Patients: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Physician referrals are a critical step in directing patients to high-quality specialists. Despite efforts to encourage referrals to high-volume hospitals, many patients receive treatment at low-volume centers with worse outcomes. We aimed to determine the most important factors considered by referring providers when selecting specialists for their patients through a systematic review of medical and surgical literature.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched from January 2000 to July 2021 using terms related to referrals, specialty, surgery, primary care, and decision-making. We included survey and interview studies reporting the factors considered by healthcare providers as they refer patients to specialists in the USA. Studies were screened by two independent reviewers. Quality was assessed using the CASP Checklist. A qualitative thematic analysis was performed to synthesize common decision factors across studies.

RESULTS

We screened 1,972 abstracts and identified 7 studies for inclusion, reporting on 1,575 providers. Thematic analysis showed that referring providers consider factors related to the specialist's clinical expertise (skill, training, outcomes, and assessments), interactions between the patient and specialist (prior experience, rapport, location, scheduling, preference, and insurance), and interactions between the referring physician and specialist (personal relationships, communication, reputation, reciprocity, and practice or system affiliation). Notably, studies did not describe how providers assess clinical or technical skills.

CONCLUSIONS

Referring providers rely on subjective factors and assessments to evaluate quality when selecting a specialist. There may be a role for guidelines and objective measures of quality to inform the choice of specialist by referring providers.

Preferences of people in choosing a family physician in rural areas: a qualitative inquiry from Iran

Background:

Creating a stable and long-term relationship called ‘longitudinality’ between the population and general practitioners is crucial for the family physician program. The constant change of family physicians (FPs) can deteriorate longitudinality. This study aims to reveal what factors people usually consider when choosing a new FP or changing their current FP.

Method:

A qualitative study with a thematic analysis approach was carried out in Ilam province, Iran, in 2019. Purposeful sampling with a maximum variation strategy was followed to select the key informants. We did 34 interviews with following groups: patients (rural residents); FPs; and experts from Iran Health Insurance Organization, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, and Health Network Development Center. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis to identify and contextualize the preferences of people in choosing a FP in rural areas. All the processes related to data coding and emerging themes were carried out using MAXQDA 2012 software.

Results:

The content of the interviews was categorized into 2 main themes, 6 sub-themes, and 39 codes. The first theme was ‘family physician characteristics’ including four sub-themes: general behaviors, social and physical characteristics, professional expertise, and pharmaceutical prescriptions. The second theme was ‘health center’ consisting of two sub-themes including location and physical features and properties of the health center.

Conclusion:

Some of the factors extracted from the interviews may have a different effect on the choice of people with different demographics. For instance, patients may have different ideas about the age, gender, years of medical practice, and finally, language and origin of the birthplace of FPs. Quantitative studies are needed to rank the factors identified in this study according to their significance for choosing FP and reveal patients’ preferences for each factor.

Which Factors Are Important to Women When Choosing a Breast Reconstruction Surgeon?

BACKGROUND

Women undergoing breast reconstruction often research their health care provider options. The authors studied which factors may influence how a woman selects a plastic surgeon for breast reconstruction surgery.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed by means of Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk; Amazon Web Services, Inc., Seattle, Wash.) to 1025 adult women. Participants were asked to imagine a scenario in which they had breast cancer, needed to undergo mastectomy, and were choosing a reconstructive surgeon. They were then asked to rank factors influencing this decision on a 1 to 7 Likert scale. Two-sample t tests were used to compare Likert scores between dichotomized categories based on participant characteristics.

RESULTS

Women assigned the highest scores [mean (standard deviation)] to online reviews on Vitals or WebMD [6.1 (1.2)], years of experience [5.7 (1.4)], recommendations from another surgeon [5.7 (1.3)] or family/friend [4.9 (1.7)], and attending a top medical school [4.7 (1.7)]. Lowest ranked factors were online advertising and surgeon demographics, including having a sex concordant (female) surgeon. After amalgamation into attribute subsections, mean (standard deviation) rated relative importance of surgeon reputation [0.72 (0.13)] was higher than that of appearance [0.46 (0.19)] and demographics [0.31 (0.13)]. Patient demographics influenced relative importance of certain attributes; older, educated, and higher-income patients placed higher value on surgeon appearance (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

When selecting a breast reconstruction surgeon, women place the highest value on surgeons' online, educational, and personal reputations. Though most show no strong preferences for surgeon demographics or physical attributes, specific features may be important for some patients. Cognizance of these preferences may enable providers to more effectively understand patient expectations.

Referrals and Decision-Making Considerations Involved in Selecting a Surgeon for Rectal Cancer Treatment in the Midwestern United States

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of superior outcomes for rectal cancer at high-volume, multidisciplinary cancer centers, many patients undergo surgery in low-volume hospitals.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine considerations of former patients with rectal cancer when selecting their surgeon and to evaluate which considerations were associated with surgery at high-volume hospitals.

DESIGN

In this retrospective cohort study, patients were surveyed about what they considered when selecting a cancer surgeon.

SETTINGS

Study data were obtained via survey and the statewide Iowa Cancer Registry.

PATIENTS

All eligible individuals diagnosed with invasive stages II/III rectal cancer from 2013 to 2017 identified through the registry were invited to participate.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were the characteristics of the hospital where they received surgery (ie, National Cancer Institute designation, Commission on Cancer accreditation, and rectal cancer surgery volume).

RESULTS

Among respondents, 318 of 417 (76%) completed surveys. Sixty-nine percent of patients selected their surgeon based on their physician's referral/recommendation, 20% based on surgeon/hospital reputation, and 11% based on personal connections to the surgeon. Participants who chose their surgeon based on reputation had significantly higher odds of surgery at National Cancer Institute-designated (OR 7.5; 95% CI, 3.8-15.0) or high-volume (OR 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.7) hospitals than those who relied on referral.

LIMITATIONS

This study took place in a Midwestern state with a predominantly white population, which limited our ability to evaluate racial/ethnic associations.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with rectal cancer relied on referrals in selecting their surgeon, and those who did were less likely to receive surgery at a National Cancer Institute-designated or high-volume hospitals compared to those who considered reputation. Future research is needed to determine the impact of these decision factors on clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. In addition, patients should be aware that relying on physician referral may not result in treatment from the most experienced or comprehensive care setting in their area. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897.REMISIONES Y CONSIDERACIONES PARA LA TOMA DE DECISIONES RELACIONADAS CON LA SELECCIÓN DE UN CIRUJANO PARA EL TRATAMIENTO DEL CÁNCER DE RECTO EN EL MEDIO OESTE DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOSANTECEDENTES:A pesar de la evidencia de resultados superiores para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto en centros oncológicos de gran volumen y multidisciplinarios, muchos pacientes se someten a cirugía en hospitales de bajo volumen.OBJETIVOS:Examinar las consideraciones de los antiguos pacientes con cáncer de recto al momento de seleccionar a su cirujano y evaluar qué consideraciones se asociaron con la cirugía en hospitales de gran volumen.DISEÑO:Encuestamos a los pacientes sobre qué aspectos consideraron al elegir un cirujano oncológico para completar este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Los datos del estudio se obtuvieron mediante una encuesta y el Registro de Cáncer del estado de Iowa.PACIENTES:Se invitó a participar a todas las personas elegibles diagnosticadas con cáncer de recto invasivo en estadios II/III entre 2013 y 2017 identificadas a través del registro.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados principales fueron las características del hospital donde fue realizada la cirugía (es decir, designación del Instituto Nacional del Cáncer, acreditación de la Comisión de Cáncer y volumen de cirugía del cáncer de recto).RESULTADOS:Hubo 318 de 417 (76%) encuestas completadas. El sesenta y nueve por ciento seleccionó a su cirujano en función de la referencia / recomendación de su médico, el 20% por la reputación del cirujano/hospital, y el 11% por sus conexiones personales con el cirujano. Los participantes que eligieron a su cirujano en función a la reputación tuvieron probabilidades significativamente más altas de cirugía en el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer designado (OR = 7,5, IC del 95%: 3,8-15,0) o en hospitales de alto volumen (OR = 2,6, IC del 95%: 1,2-5,7) que aquellos que dependían de la derivación.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un estado del medio oeste con una población predominantemente blanca, lo que limitó nuestra capacidad para evaluar las asociaciones raciales/étnicas.CONCLUSIONES:La mayoría de los pacientes con cáncer de recto dependían de las derivaciones para seleccionar a su cirujano, y los que lo hacían tenían menos probabilidades de recibir cirugía en un hospital designado por el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer o en hospitales de gran volumen en comparación con los que consideraban la reputación. Se necesitan investigaciones a futuro para determinar el impacto de estos factores de decisión en los resultados clínicos, la satisfacción del paciente y la calidad de vida. Además, los pacientes deben ser conscientes de que depender de la remisión de un médico puede no resultar en el tratamiento más experimentado o integral en su área. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897. (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto).

Assessment of Racial Disparities in the Risks of Septic and Aseptic Revision Total Knee Replacements

Importance

Black patients are at higher risk of revision total knee replacement (TKR) than White patients, but whether racial disparities exist for both septic and aseptic revision TKR and the reason for any disparities are unknown.

Objective

To assess the risk of septic and aseptic revision TKR in Black and White patients and to examine interactions among race and socioeconomic and hospital-related variables that are associated with revision TKR risk.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included residents of New York, California, and Florida who underwent TKR. Patient-level data were obtained from the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System, California's Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development Patient Discharge Database, and Florida's Healthcare Utilization Project State Inpatient Database from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2014. Community characteristics were calculated from the US Census and linked to discharges by patient zip code. American Hospital Association Annual Survey data were linked to discharges using hospital identifiers. The analyses were performed from March 1 to October 30, 2020, with subsequent analyses in April 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to measure the association of race with septic and aseptic revision TKR.

Results

A total of 722 492 patients underwent primary TKR, of whom 445 616 (61.68%) were female and 61 092 (8.46%) were Black. Black patients were at higher risk of septic (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.20) and aseptic (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.33-1.46) revision TKR compared with White patients. Other risk factors for septic revision TKR were diabetes (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.17-1.30), obesity (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.17-1.30), kidney disease (HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.29-1.57), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.15-1.30), inflammatory arthritis (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.39-1.69), surgical site complications during the index TKR (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.87-2.56), Medicaid insurance (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.31), and low annual TKR volume at the hospital where the index TKR was performed (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.41-1.68). Risk factors for aseptic revision TKR were male sex (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.06), workers' compensation insurance (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.51-1.72), and low hospital TKR volume (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07-1.22). Patients with obesity had a lower risk of aseptic TKR revision (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.84). In an analysis within each category of hospital TKR volume, the HR for aseptic revision among Black vs White patients was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.04-1.37) at very-low-volume hospitals (≤89 TKRs annually) compared with 1.68 (95% CI, 1.48-1.90) at very-high-volume hospitals (≥645 TKRs annually).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, Black patients were at significantly higher risk of aseptic revision TKR and, to a lesser extent, septic revision TKR compared with White patients. Racial disparities in aseptic revision risk were greatest at hospitals with very high TKR volumes.

Patient and Hospital Factors Associated With Differences in Mortality Rates Among Black and White US Medicare Beneficiaries Hospitalized With COVID-19 Infection

IMPORTANCE

Black patients hospitalized with COVID-19 may have worse outcomes than White patients because of excess individual risk or because Black patients are disproportionately cared for in hospitals with worse outcomes for all.

OBJECTIVES

To examine differences in COVID-19 hospital mortality rates between Black and White patients and to assess whether the mortality rates reflect differences in patient characteristics by race or by the hospitals to which Black and White patients are admitted.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study assessed Medicare beneficiaries admitted with a diagnosis of COVID-19 to 1188 US hospitals from January 1, 2020, through September 21, 2020.

EXPOSURE

Hospital admission for a diagnosis of COVID-19.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary composite outcome was inpatient death or discharge to hospice within 30 days of admission. We estimated the association of patient-level characteristics (including age, sex, zip code-level income, comorbidities, admission from a nursing facility, and days since January 1, 2020) with differences in mortality or discharge to hospice among Black and White patients. To examine the association with the hospital itself, we adjusted for the specific hospitals to which patients were admitted. We used simulation modeling to estimate the mortality among Black patients had they instead been admitted to the hospitals where White patients were admitted.

RESULTS

Of the 44 217 Medicare beneficiaries included in the study, 24 281 (55%) were women; mean (SD) age was 76.3 (10.5) years; 33 459 participants (76%) were White, and 10 758 (24%) were Black. Overall, 2634 (8%) White patients and 1100 (10%) Black patients died as inpatients, and 1670 (5%) White patients and 350 (3%) Black patients were discharged to hospice within 30 days of hospitalization, for a total mortality-equivalent rate of 12.86% for White patients and 13.48% for Black patients. Black patients had similar odds of dying or being discharged to hospice (odds ratio [OR], 1.06; 95% CI, 0.99-1.12) in an unadjusted comparison with White patients. After adjustment for clinical and sociodemographic patient characteristics, Black patients were more likely to die or be discharged to hospice (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19). This difference became indistinguishable when adjustment was made for the hospitals where care was delivered (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.10). In simulations, if Black patients in this sample were instead admitted to the same hospitals as White patients in the same distribution, their rate of mortality or discharge to hospice would decline from the observed rate of 13.48% to the simulated rate of 12.23% (95% CI for difference, 1.20%-1.30%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study found that Black patients hospitalized with COVID-19 had higher rates of hospital mortality or discharge to hospice than White patients after adjustment for the personal characteristics of those patients. However, those differences were explained by differences in the hospitals to which Black and White patients were admitted.

Patterns and characteristics of patients' selection of cancer surgeons

OBJECTIVE

Despite evidence of volume-outcome relationships for cancer surgery, treatment at low-volume hospitals remains common. Our objective was to evaluate whether individuals actively involved in selecting their cancer surgeon were more likely to go to hospitals recognized for quality cancer care.

METHODS

Individuals diagnosed with breast, prostate and colorectal cancer in 2015 completed online surveys in 2017-2018. Participants were categorized as "directed" to a surgeon (relied on referral) or "active" (sought additional information), and hospitals were categorized by NCI-designation, CoC accreditation, and academic affiliation.

RESULTS

Of 299 participants, 42% were active. Individuals with breast cancer were more active (aOR = 2.46,95%CI:1.32-4.59). Active participants had nonsignificantly higher odds of surgery at NCI-designated facilities (aOR = 2.04,95%CI:0.95-4.38), or academic centers (aOR = 1.51,95%CI:0.86-2.64).

CONCLUSIONS

While most participants were directed to their cancer surgeon, active participants tended to select NCI-designated/academic hospitals. Although centralization of cancer care would require altering referral patterns, decision-support resources may help patients make informed choices.

Racial differences in the relationship between surgical choice and subsequent patient-reported satisfaction outcomes among women with early-stage hormone-positive breast cancer

PURPOSE

The last fifteen years has seen a rising proportion of women who are eligible for breast conserving therapy (BCT) choosing mastectomy despite equivalent survival in early-stage breast cancer. We aim to explore potential racial differences in the association of surgical choice with subsequent patient-reported satisfaction outcomes.

METHODS

Women who were within one year of diagnosis with hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer were asked the Short Version of Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ-18), which assesses their overall satisfaction with their medical care. We conducted bivariate analyses, including paired t-tests, to clarify differences in these patient-reported factors by surgical choice and race. Multivariable linear regression models were used to adjust for clinical and demographic control variables.

RESULTS

For the sample of 279 women who underwent definitive surgery, women who received a mastectomy had lower levels of overall satisfaction, 71 vs. 75 (out of 90) (p = .001). In stratifying this relationship by race, the difference in total satisfaction score was largest among Black women (69 among mastectomy patients vs. 75 among BCT patients; p = 0.016). On multivariable linear regression, Black race and mastectomy status (together) exhibited a significantly large negative association with total satisfaction score, with negative associations across all domains of the PSQ-18.

CONCLUSION

Despite the high prevalence of mastectomy among Black women with early-stage, HR-positive breast cancer, this population is more likely to report lower levels of patient satisfaction compared to patients receiving BCT. These findings suggest there may be potential racial differences in the psychosocial consequences of surgical choice.

Hospital Characteristics and Breast Cancer Survival in the California Breast Cancer Survivorship Consortium

INTRODUCTION

Racial/ethnic disparities in breast cancer survival are well documented, but the influence of health care institutions is unclear. We therefore examined the effect of hospital characteristics on survival.

METHODS

Harmonized data pooled from 5 case-control and prospective cohort studies within the California Breast Cancer Survivorship Consortium were linked to the California Cancer Registry and the California Neighborhoods Data System. The study included 9,701 patients with breast cancer who were diagnosed between 1993 and 2007. First reporting hospitals were classified by hospital type-National Cancer Institute (NCI) -designated cancer center, American College of Surgeons (ACS) Cancer Program, other-and hospital composition of the neighborhood socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity of patients with cancer. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for clinical and patient-level prognostic factors were used to examine the influence of hospital characteristics on survival.

RESULTS

Fewer than one half of women received their initial care at an NCI-designated cancer center (5%) or ACS program (38%) hospital. Receipt of initial care in ACS program hospitals varied by race/ethnicity-highest among non-Latina White patients (45%), and lowest among African Americans (21%). African-American women had superior breast cancer survival when receiving initial care in ACS hospitals versus other hospitals (non-ACS program and non-NCI-designated cancer center; hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.83). Other hospital characteristics were not associated with survival.

CONCLUSION

African American women may benefit significantly from breast cancer care in ACS program hospitals; however, most did not receive initial care at such facilities. Future research should identify the aspects of ACS program hospitals that are associated with higher survival and evaluate strategies by which to enhance access to and use of high-quality hospitals, particularly among African American women.

Disparities in the Use of Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection for Early Stage Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials have long established the long-term safety of omitting axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) after sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) in patients with clinically node-negative early stage breast cancer. The variations in utilization of SLND and ALND in this patient population, however, are currently unknown.

METHODS

Adult female patients (40 years and older) within the National Cancer Database diagnosed with breast cancer between January 2013 and December 2015, who had clinical T1-T2 and N0 disease, and who underwent either SLND (with or without subsequent ALND) or ALND were included. Differences in utilization across race, ethnicity, insurance type, facility, and residential characteristics were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 271,689 patients were included, of which 26,527 (10%) received ALND and 245,162 (90%) underwent SLND. After adjusting for demographics and cancer characteristics, black (odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.06-1.17) and Hispanic women (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24) were more likely to receive ALND. Patients without health insurance (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.19-1.47), compared with private health insurance, and those receiving treatment at community cancer centers (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.53-1.67), compared with academic/research centers, were also more likely to receive ALND.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the vast majority of women undergo SLND, significant disparities exist in its utilization for early stage breast cancer, with traditionally underserved patients receiving unwarranted extensive axillary surgery. Increased patient and surgeon education is needed to decrease variations in care that can affect patient's quality of life.

Assessing the Impact of CALGB 9343 on Surgical Trends in Elderly-Women With Stage I ER+ Breast Cancer: A SEER-Based Analysis

Purpose: Lumpectomy (L) and breast radiotherapy (RT) results in equivalent outcomes in comparison to mastectomy (M) for early-stage breast cancer (BC) based on randomized controlled trials (RCT). Since 2004, RCT support that L without RT yields equivalent survival and acceptable local-regional outcomes in women ≥70-years old with T1N0 hormone-sensitive (ER+) BC on endocrine therapy. Based on this, we hypothesized that M rates should decrease substantially after 2004 in this low-risk elderly population.

Methods: We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registry data to conduct this study. We included women with T1N0 ER+ BC from 2000 to 2014. We compared M rates in women diagnosed from 2000 to 2004 vs. 2005–2012 using the Chi-Square test. Logistic regression analyses was performed to examine demographic/clinical factors associated with mastectomy.

Results: 67,506 women met the study criteria. In elderly Stage I ER+ BC, the M rate decreased by 6.3%: 29.0% before 2004 to 22.7% after 2004 (p < 0.0001). M rates remained higher in elderly non-Hispanic black (NHB, 27.1%, p < 0.0001), non-Hispanic Asian-Pacific-Islander (NHAPI, 30.1%, p < 0.0001), and Hispanics (24.4%, p = 0.0004) vs. non-Hispanic White (NHW, 21.5%). Treatment in the modern cohort was associated with decreased odds of mastectomy (OR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.68-0.74, p < 0.0001) while NH-API race was associated with the highest increased odds of mastectomy (OR = 1.65, 95% 1.53-1.78, p < 0.0001). In the modern cohort specifically (2005–2014), Hispanic women (OR = 1.12, p = 0.014), NHB women (OR = 1.21, p < 0.0001), and NHAPI women (OR = 1.73, p < 0.0001) all had higher odds of undergoing mastectomy relative to NHW women after adjusting for all other patient and tumor related factors.

Conclusions: In elderly patients with stage I, ER+ BC, M rates have decreased modestly since 2004. These trends are driven mostly be decreases in the M rate in NHW women, but M rates remain ~25% in Hispanic, NHB, and NHAPI women. Further research is needed to identify why M, which is associated with higher cost and morbidity than L alone, has not changed substantially in elderly, low-risk BC.

Variations in the utilization of immediate post-mastectomy breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

For female breast cancer (BC) patients undergoing mastectomy, post-mastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) confers significant psychosocial benefits and improved cosmetic outcomes. The objective of this study is to explore whether the utilization of PMBR varies by race, marital status, and geographical location of the patient.

METHODS

Women ≥18 years old who underwent mastectomy for breast cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2014 were eligible. Women with inflammatory BC, Stage IV BC diagnoses, and bilateral BC were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for patient and cancer characteristics, were used to assess the association between of race, marital status, and region on immediate PMBR utilization.

RESULTS

321,206 women were included and 24% underwent immediate PMBR (<4 months after mastectomy). Compared to white women, black and other non-white women (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.65, 0.70 and OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.50, 0.53, respectively) were significantly less likely to receive PMBR. Additionally, women who were single (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.70, 0.75) or no longer married (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.82, 0.86) were significantly less likely to undergo breast reconstruction, compared to married women. Regional differences were also seen, with women in the Northeast (OR 2.11, 95% CI 2.05,2.17), Midwest (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.48, 1.58) and South (OR 1.20, 95%CI 1.17, 1.23) all being more likely to undergo breast reconstruction compared to the West.

DISCUSSION

Significant variations exist in the utilization of post-mastectomy breast reconstruction across race, marital status or geographical location of the patient. Further research is needed to elucidate these differences and identify areas for intervention to increase awareness, and access to reconstruction for all breast cancer patients.

Improving Communication in Breast Cancer Treatment Consultation: Use of a Computer Test of Health Numeracy

Background: Communication of statistics and probability is challenging in the cancer care setting. The objectives of this study are to evaluate a novel approach to cancer communication through the use of a computer assessment of patient health numeracy. Methods: We conducted a pilot study of the Computer Adapted Test of Numeracy Understanding in Medicine Instrument (CAT-NUMi) before the cancer treatment consultation for women with stage 0-3 breast cancer. Patient outcomes included the interpersonal processes of care (IPC) and the decisional conflict scale. We evaluated clinician use of numeric information in the cancer consultation and assessed feasibility outcomes from the clinician and patient perspective. Results: Patient participants (n = 50) had a median (interquartile range) age of 51 years (46-61), 70% were English speaking, and 30% Spanish speaking. Decisional conflict was low with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) decisional conflict score of 17.4 (12.3). The lack of clarity score (range 1-5) on the IPC was low (mean, SD),1.70 (0.71), indicating clear communication. Clinicians more often used percentages in communicating prognosis among those with higher numeracy scores (median, range): high (2, 0-8), medium (1, 0-7), and low (0, 0-8); p = 0.04. The patient experience of taking the CAT-NUMi was rated as very good or excellent by 65%, fair by 33%, and poor by 2% of patients. Conclusion: Screening for health numeracy with a short computer-based test may be a feasible strategy to optimize clear communication in the cancer treatment consultation. Further studies are needed to evaluate this strategy across cancer treatment clinical settings and populations.

Facts and Fears in Public Reporting: Patients' Information Needs and Priorities When Selecting a Hospital for Cancer Care

Objective. Public reporting on the quality of provider care has the potential to empower patients to make evidence-based decisions. Yet patients seldom consult resources such as provider report cards in part because they perceive the information as irrelevant. To inform more effective public reporting, we investigated patients' information priorities when selecting a hospital for cancer treatment. We hypothesized that patients would be most interested in data on clinical outcomes. Methods. An experienced moderator led a series of focus groups using a semistructured discussion guide. Separate sessions were held with patients aged 18 to 54 years and those older than 54 years in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Phoenix, Arizona; and Indianapolis, Indiana, in 2017. All 38 participants had received treatment for cancer within the past 2 years and had a choice of hospitals. Results. In selecting hospitals for cancer treatment, many participants reported that they considered factors such as reputation, quality of the facilities, and experiences of other patients. For most, however, decisions were guided by trusted advisors, with the majority agreeing that a physician's opinion would sway them to disregard objective data about hospital quality. Nonetheless, nearly all expressed interest in having comparative data. Participants varied in selecting from a hypothetical list, "the top 3 things you would want to know when choosing a hospital for cancer care." The most commonly preferred items were overall care quality, timeliness, and patient satisfaction. Contrary to our hypothesis, many preferred to avoid viewing comparative clinical outcomes, particularly survival. Conclusions. Patients' information preferences are diverse. Fear or other emotional responses might deter patients from viewing outcomes data such as survival. Additional research should explore optimal ways to help patients incorporate comparative data on the components of quality they value into decision making.

Examining Associations of Racial Residential Segregation With Patient Knowledge of Breast Cancer and Treatment Receipt

BACKGROUND

The effect of racial residential segregation on breast cancer treatment disparities is unclear. We examined whether racial segregation is associated with adjuvant treatment receipt and patient knowledge of disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We surveyed a population-based sample of women in Northern California with stage I to III breast cancer diagnosed in 2010 to 2011 (participation rate = 68.5%, 500 patients). For black, Hispanic, and white women, we measured black and Hispanic segregation using the location quotient (LQ) of racial residential segregation, a proportional measure of the size of a minority group in the census tract compared with the larger metropolitan statistical area. We categorized LQ values for black and Hispanic participants into quartiles, with quartile 1 representing a lower relative level of segregation than quartile 4. We used multivariable logistical regression to assess the odds of receiving guideline-recommended adjuvant therapy and patient knowledge of tumor characteristics according to relative residential segregation.

RESULTS

We observed greater residential segregation for black versus Hispanic patients (P < .05). Overall, there were no treatment differences according to Hispanic or black LQ, except for black LQ quartile 3 (vs. 1) for which we observed higher odds of hormonal therapy. Knowledge of disease did not vary according to black LQ, but patients in the Hispanic LQ quartile 3 (vs. quartile 1) had less tumor knowledge.

CONCLUSION

We did not find clear associations for racial residential segregation and treatment or cancer knowledge in Northern California, an area with low levels of segregation. Additional research should assess the effect of segregation on breast cancer treatment disparities in a variety of geographical locations.

Socioeconomic Predictors of Pituitary Surgery

Background: There exists a lack of data on the effect of socioeconomic status (SES) on outcomes for pituitary tumors, which have been associated with significant morbidity. The goal of this population-level study is to investigate the role of SES on receiving treatment and survival in patients with pituitary tumors.

Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program database from the National Cancer Institute was used to identify patients diagnosed with pituitary tumors between 2003 and 2012. SES was determined using a validated composite index. Race was categorized as Caucasian and non-Caucasian. Treatment received included surgery, radiation, and radiation with surgery. Odds of receiving surgery and survival probability were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards model, respectively.

Results: A total of 25,802 patients with pituitary tumors were identified for analysis. High SES tertile (odds ratio (OR) = 1.095; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.059, 1.132]) and quintile (OR = 1.052; 95% CI [1.031, 1.072]) were associated with higher odds of receiving surgery (p<0.0001). Caucasian patients had higher odds of receiving surgery when compared to non-Caucasian patients (OR = 1.064; 95% CI [1.000, 1.133]; p<0.05). Neither SES nor race were significant predictors of survival probability.

Conclusion: Socioeconomic status and race were found to be associated with higher odds of receiving surgery for pituitary tumors, and thus serve as independent predictors of surgical management. Further studies are required to investigate possible causes for these findings.

Critical Choices: What Information Do Patients Want When Selecting a Hospital for Cancer Surgery?

PURPOSE

Access to comparative information on hospitals' quality of cancer care is limited. Patients' interest in using this information when selecting a hospital for cancer surgery and the specific data they would desire are unknown. This study gauges patients' demand for comparative information on hospitals' quality of cancer surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, national survey of 3,334 US residents who had received cancer surgery. The outcomes were patients' reported likelihood of using a list of best hospitals for cancer surgery and patients' reported interest in information about specific clinical outcomes, including 4-year survival after surgery, 30-day mortality after surgery, and rate of complications from surgery.

RESULTS

Two thirds of patients (68%) reported being actively involved in selecting a hospital for their surgery, and two thirds (65%) reported that their physician was involved in or made this decision. When asked what information might have helped them to choose a hospital, participants identified the hospital's reputation (55%), patient satisfaction (44%), and the number of cancer surgeries performed at the hospital (36%). Approximately three quarters (73%) reported being likely to use a list of best hospitals for cancer surgery when selecting a hospital. Approximately 40% expressed interest in having information on at least one clinical outcome.

CONCLUSION

Widespread interest exists among patients with cancer for comparative information on hospital quality as well as on clinical outcomes and hospitals' reputation for cancer surgery. Policy reforms and additional research should address the unmet need for transparent, comprehensive data on the quality of hospitals' cancer care.

Factors associated with patients' choice of physician in the Korean population: Database analyses of a tertiary hospital

This study aimed to determine the factors influencing patients’ choice of physician at the first visit through database analysis of a tertiary hospital in South Korea. We collected data on the first treatments performed by physicians who had treated patients for at least 3 consecutive years over 10 years (from 2003 to 2012) from the database of Seoul National University’s affiliated tertiary hospital. Ultimately, we obtained data on 524,012 first treatments of 319,004 patients performed by 115 physicians. Variables including physicians’ age and medical school and patients’ age were evaluated as influencing factors for the number of first treatments performed by each physician in each year using a Poisson regression through generalized estimating equations with a log link. The number of first treatments decreased over the study period. Notably, the relative risk for first treatments was lower among older physicians than among younger physicians (relative risk 0.96; 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 0.98). Physicians graduating from Seoul National University (SNU) also had a higher risk for performing first treatments than did those not from SNU (relative risk 1.58; 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 2.10). Finally, relative risk was also higher among older patients than among younger patients (relative risk 1.03; 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.04). This study systematically demonstrated that physicians’ age, whether the physician graduated from the highest-quality university, and patients’ age all related to patients’ choice of physician at the first visit in a tertiary university hospital. These findings might be due to Korean cultural factors.

Excess Readmission-Based Penalty: Is Arthroplasty Different From the Other Outcomes?

Whether factors not under a hospital's control affect readmissions remains intensely debated in the context of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Hospital Readmission Reduction Program. This study aimed to evaluate the potential effects of poverty, race, and hospital volume on excess readmissions, with >3000 hospitals participating in "Hospital Compare." Correlations between excess readmission ratios for five eligible outcomes (including hip and knee arthroplasty) were assessed with the three area and hospital-level factors: poverty, race (percent of black population), and hospital volume (number of discharges). Correlation coefficients of the ratios with race were approximately r = 0.2, consistently larger than those with poverty (r = 0-0.1), and those with volume were r = 0 to -0.5. Hip and knee arthroplasty had unique findings: null correlation with poverty (r ≈ 0), largest variability, and strong monotonicity with volume (r ≈ -0.5). The percent of Hispanic population showed negligible correlations in secondary analysis. Penalty assessment and hospital profiling should consider areas with high percentages of black population and a small volume of hospitals and providers of hip and knee surgery. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 27(4):286-294, 2018).

Breast Cancer Disparities at Home and Abroad: A Review of the Challenges and Opportunities for System-Level Change

Sizeable disparities exist in breast cancer outcomes, both between Black and White patients in the United States, and between patients in the United States and other high-income countries compared with low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). In both settings, health system factors are key drivers of disparities. In the United States, Black women are more likely to die of breast cancer than Whites and have poorer outcomes, even among patients with similar stage and tumor subtype. Over-representation of higher risk "triple-negative" breast cancers contributes to breast cancer mortality in Black women; however, the greatest survival disparities occur within the good-prognosis hormone receptor-positive (HR+) subtypes. Disparities in access to treatment within the complex U.S. health system may be responsible for a substantial portion of these differences in survival. In LMICs, breast cancer mortality rates are substantially higher than in the United States, whereas incidence continues to rise. This mortality burden is largely attributable to health system factors, including late-stage presentation at diagnosis and lack of availability of systemic therapy. This article will review the existing evidence for how health system factors in the United States contribute to breast cancer disparities, discuss methods for studying the relationship of health system factors to racial disparities, and provide examples of health system interventions that show promise for mitigating breast cancer disparities. We will then review evidence of global breast cancer disparities in LMICs, the treatment factors that contribute to these disparities, and actions being taken to combat breast cancer disparities around the world. Clin Cancer Res; 23(11); 2655-64. ©2017 AACRSee all articles in this CCR Focus section, "Breast Cancer Research: From Base Pairs to Populations."

How Men with Prostate Cancer Choose Specialists: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

The specific specialist that a patient sees can have a large influence on the type of care they receive.

METHODS

We administered semistructured interviews with 47 men diagnosed with prostate adenocarcinoma between 2012 and 2014. Telephone interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a systematic thematic approach.

RESULTS

Three profiles of patients emerged for choosing specialists: active (21.3%), partially active (53.2%), and passive (25.5%). Active patients conducted substantial research when choosing a diagnosing urologist and a treating specialist: they searched online, consulted other men with prostate cancer, and/or visited multiple specialists for opinions. Partially active patients took only 1 additional step to find a treating specialist on their own after receiving a referral from their diagnosing urologist. Passive patients relied exclusively on referrals from their primary care physicians (PCPs) and diagnosing urologists.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients relied on their PCPs for referrals to diagnosing urologists and on their diagnosing urologists to choose the treating specialist. Given these findings and the significance of specialist choice in determining treatment, it is important that PCPs recognize their indirect but potentially important effect on treatment choice when making referrals for prostate cancer. PCPs should consider counseling patients about seeking second opinions from providers with different treatment perspectives and participating in treatment decisions.

African Americans Have Better Outcomes for Five Common Gastrointestinal Diagnoses in Hospitals With More Racially Diverse Patients

OBJECTIVES

We sought to characterize the relationship between hospital inpatient racial diversity and outcomes for African-American patients including rates of major complications or mortality during hospitalization for five common gastrointestinal diagnoses.

METHODS

Using the 2012 National Inpatient Sample database, hospital inpatient racial diversity was defined as the percentage of African-American patients discharged from each hospital. Logistic regression was used to predict major complication rates or death, long length of stay, and high total charges. Control variables included age, gender, payer type, patient location, area-associated income quartile, hospital characteristics including size, urban vs. rural, teaching vs. nonteaching, region, and the interaction of the percentage of African Americans with patient race.

RESULTS

There were 848,395 discharges across 3,392 hospitals. The patient population was on average 27% minority (s.d.±21%) with African Americans accounting for 14% of all patients. Overall, African-American patients had higher rates of major complications or death relative to white patients (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-1.23). However, when treated in hospitals with higher patient racial diversity, African-American patients experienced significantly lower rates of major complications or mortality (aOR 0.80; 95% CI 0.74-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

African Americans have better outcomes for five common gastrointestinal diagnoses when treated in hospitals with higher inpatient racial diversity. This has major ramifications on total hospital charges.

Higher Stage of Disease Is Associated With Bilateral Mastectomy Among Patients With Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Survey

BACKGROUND

The reasons for increasing rates of bilateral mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer are incompletely understood, and associations of disease stage with bilateral surgery have been inconsistent. We examined associations of clinical and sociodemographic factors, including stage, with surgery type and reconstruction receipt among women with breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We surveyed a diverse population-based sample of women from Northern California cancer registries with stage 0 to III breast cancer diagnosed during 2010-2011 (participation rate, 68.5%). Using multinomial logistic regression, we examined factors associated with bilateral and unilateral mastectomy (vs. breast-conserving surgery), adjusting for tumor and sociodemographic characteristics. In a second model, we examined factors associated with reconstruction for mastectomy-treated patients.

RESULTS

Among 487 participants, 58% had breast-conserving surgery, 32% had unilateral mastectomy, and 10% underwent bilateral mastectomy. In adjusted analyses, women with stage III (vs. stage 0) cancers had higher odds of bilateral mastectomy (odds ratio [OR], 8.28; 95% confidence interval, 2.32-29.50); women with stage II and III (vs. stage 0) disease had higher odds of unilateral mastectomy. Higher (vs. lower) income was also associated with bilateral mastectomy, while age ≥ 60 years (vs. < 50 years) was associated with lower odds of bilateral surgery. Among mastectomy-treated patients (n = 206), bilateral mastectomy, unmarried status, and higher education and income were all associated with reconstruction (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

In this population-based cohort, women with the greatest risk of distant recurrence were most likely to undergo bilateral mastectomy despite a lack of clear medical benefit, raising concern for overtreatment. Our findings highlight the need for interventions to assure women are making informed surgical decisions.