The Enhancing Oncology Model: Leveraging improvement science to increase health equity in value-based care

Trends in Utilization and Medicare Spending on Short-Course Radiation Therapy for Breast and Prostate Cancer: An Episode-Based Analysis From 2015 to 2019

PURPOSE

Evidence supports the value of shorter, similarly efficacious, and potentially more cost-effective hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) regimens in many clinical scenarios for breast cancer (BC) and prostate cancer (PC). However, practice patterns vary considerably. We used the most recent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to assess trends in RT cost and practice patterns among episodes of BC and PC.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of all external beam RT episodes for BC and PC from 2015 to 2019 to assess predictors of short-course RT (SCRT) use and calculated spending differences. Multivariable logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios of receipt of SCRT over longer-course RT (LCRT) by treatment modality, age, year of diagnosis, type of practice, and the interaction between year and treatment setting. Medicare spending was evaluated using multivariable linear regression controlling for duration of RT regimen (SCRT vs LCRT) in addition to the above covariables.

RESULTS

Of 143,729 BC episodes and 114,214 PC episodes, 63,623 (44.27%) and 25,955 (22.72%) were SCRT regimens, respectively. Median total spending for SCRT regimens among BC episodes was $9418 (interquartile range [IQR], $7966-$10,983) versus $13,602 (IQR, $11,814-$15,499) for LCRT. Among PC episodes, median total spending was $6924 (IQR, $4,509-$12,905) for stereotactic body RT, $18,768 (IQR, $15,421-$20,740) for moderate hypofractionation, and $27,319 (IQR, $25,446-$29,421) for LCRT. On logistic regression, receipt of SCRT was associated with older age among both BC and PC episodes as well as treatment at hospital-affiliated over freestanding sites (P < .001 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

In this evaluation of BC and PC RT episodes from 2015 to 2019, we found that shorter-course RT resulted in lower costs than longer-course RT. SCRT was also more common in hospital-affiliated sites. Future research focusing on potential payment incentives encouraging SCRT when clinically appropriate in the 2 most common cancers treated with RT will be valuable as the field continues to prospectively evaluate cost-effective hypofractionation in other disease sites.

Advancing healthcare equity through dissemination and implementation science

OBJECTIVE

To provide guiding principles and recommendations for how approaches from the field of dissemination and implementation (D&I) science can advance healthcare equity.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

This article, part of a special issue sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), is based on an outline drafted to support proceedings of the 2022 AHRQ Health Equity Summit and further revised to reflect input from Summit attendees.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a narrative review of the current and potential applications of D&I approaches for understanding and advancing healthcare equity, followed by discussion and feedback with Summit attendees.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We identified major themes in narrative and systematic reviews related to D&I science, healthcare equity, and their intersections. Based on our expertise, and supported by synthesis of published studies, we propose recommendations for how D&I science is relevant for advancing healthcare equity. We used iterative discussions internally and at the Summit to refine preliminary findings and recommendations.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We identified four guiding principles and three D&I science domains with strong promise for accelerating progress toward healthcare equity. We present eight recommendations and more than 60 opportunities for action by practitioners, healthcare leaders, policy makers, and researchers.

CONCLUSIONS

Promising areas for D&I science to impact healthcare equity include the following: attention to equity in the development and delivery of evidence-based interventions; the science of adaptation; de-implementation of low-value care; monitoring equity markers; organizational policies for healthcare equity; improving the economic evaluation of implementation; policy and dissemination research; and capacity building.

National Survey Using CFIR to Assess Early Outpatient Specialty Palliative Care Implementation

CONTEXT

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) recommends that outpatient specialty palliative care (OSPC) be offered within eight weeks of an advanced cancer diagnosis. To meet the rising demand, there has been an increase in the availability of OSPC services at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers; however, many OSPC referrals still occur late in the disease course.

OBJECTIVES

Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we evaluated facilitators and barriers to early OSPC implementation and associated clinic characteristics.

METHODS

We selected relevant CFIR constructs for inclusion in a survey that was distributed to the OSPC clinic leader at each NCI-designated cancer center. For each statement, respondents were instructed to rate the degree to which they agreed on a five-point Likert scale. We used descriptive statistics to summarize responses to survey items and explore differences in barriers based on OSPC clinic size and maturity.

RESULTS

Of 60 eligible sites, 40 (67%) completed the survey. The most commonly agreed upon barriers to early OSPC included inadequate number of OSPC providers (73%), lack of performance metric goals (65%), insufficient space to deliver early OSPC (58%), logistical challenges created by early OSPC (55%), and absence of formal interdisciplinary communication systems (53%). The most frequently reported barriers differed according to clinic size and maturity.

CONCLUSION

Most barriers were modifiable in nature and related to the "Inner Setting" domain of the CFIR, which highlights the need for careful strategic planning by leadership when implementing early OSPC.