Objective To evaluate the influence of distance on access to high-volume surgical treatment for patients with uterine cancer in Maryland.
Methods The Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission database was retrospectively searched to identify primary uterine cancer surgical cases from 1994 to 2010. Race, type of insurance, year of surgery, community setting, and both surgeon and hospital volume were collected. Geographical coordinates of hospital and patient’s zip code were used to calculate primary independent outcomes of distance traveled and distance from nearest high-volume hospital (HVH). Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and confidence intervals.
Results From 1994 to 2010, 8529 women underwent primary surgical management of uterine cancer in Maryland. Multivariable analysis demonstrated white race, rural residence, surgery by a high-volume surgeon and surgery from 2003 to 2010 to be associated with both travel 50 miles or more to the treating hospital and residence 50 miles or more from the nearest HVH (all P < 0.05). Patients who travel 50 miles or more to the treating hospital are more likely to have surgery at a HVH (odds ratio, 6.03; 95% confidence interval, 4.67–7.79) In contrast, patients, who reside ≥50 miles from a HVH, are less likely to have their surgery at an HVH. (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.32–0.42).
Conclusion In Maryland, 50 miles or more from residence to the nearest HVH is a barrier to high-volume care. However, patients who travel 50 miles or more seem to do so to receive care by a high-volume surgeon at an HVH. In Maryland, Nonwhites are more likely to live closer to an HVH and more likely to use these services.
- Endometrial cancer
- Access to care
- Primary surgery
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.