Literature DB >> 11880080

Variations in use of imaging in a national sample of men with early-stage prostate cancer.

Christopher S Saigal1, Chris L Pashos, James M Henning, Mark S Litwin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To measure the national practice variations in imaging studies performed for men newly diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer.
METHODS: We created an analytic file from 1991 to 1996 Medicare claims data using files for a random sample of 5% of all Medicare beneficiaries. Among men with newly diagnosed clinically localized prostate cancer, we identified those undergoing staging bone scans, staging computed tomography (CT), or staging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the time of diagnosis. We conducted univariate and multivariate analyses adjusting for Charlson index score, age group, race, geographic region, and year of diagnosis.
RESULTS: In all geographic regions, men receiving radiation therapy (RT) were more likely than those receiving radical prostatectomy (RP) to undergo CT. In the South, RT patients were significantly more likely than RP patients to undergo MRI and bone scans. In the West, RT patients were significantly more likely than RP patients to have bone scans. In multivariate analyses that controlled for all significant univariate findings, treatment with RT significantly predicted for the use of bone scans (odds ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.31), CT scans (odds ratio 3.26, 95% confidence interval 3.18 to 3.34), and MRI scans (odds ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.23 to 1.72). Regional differences in the use of imaging technologies for staging persisted in the multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing RT for clinically localized prostate cancer undergo more bone, CT, and MRI scans than do patients undergoing RP, regardless of comorbidity, age, or race. In addition, a significant geographic variation was found in the use of these diagnostic tests. These variations suggest that evidence-based staging guidelines have not been met with broad physician acceptance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11880080     DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01543-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  10 in total

1.  Regional-Level Correlations in Inappropriate Imaging Rates for Prostate and Breast Cancers: Potential Implications for the Choosing Wisely Campaign.

Authors:  Danil V Makarov; Pamela R Soulos; Heather T Gold; James B Yu; Sounok Sen; Joseph S Ross; Cary P Gross
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 31.777

2.  Appropriateness of Prostate Cancer Imaging among Veterans in a Delivery System without Incentives for Overutilization.

Authors:  Danil V Makarov; Elaine Y C Hu; Dawn Walter; R Scott Braithwaite; Scott Sherman; Heather T Gold; Xiao-Hua Andrew Zhou; Cary P Gross; Steven B Zeliadt
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Use of Evidence-Based Prostate Cancer Imaging in a Nongovernmental Integrated Health Care System.

Authors:  Ramzi G Salloum; Maureen O'Keeffe-Rosetti; Debra P Ritzwoller; Mark C Hornbrook; Jennifer Elston Lafata; Matthew E Nielsen
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  Evaluation of Posttreatment Follow-Up of Patients With Prostate Cancer Relative to the American College of Radiology's Appropriateness Criteria.

Authors:  Jennifer S McDonald; Rickey E Carter; R Jeffrey Karnes; John D Port; Akira Kawashima; Stephanie K Carlson; Claire E Bender
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Appropriateness of imaging for lung cancer staging in a national cohort.

Authors:  Leah M Backhus; Farhood Farjah; Thomas K Varghese; Aaron M Cheng; Xiao-Hua Zhou; Douglas E Wood; Larry Kessler; Steven B Zeliadt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-09-22       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Thromboembolic complications of sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence among female Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Jennifer T Anger; Aviva E Weinberg; John L Gore; Qin Wang; Chris L Pashos; Michael J Leonardi; Larissa V Rodríguez; Mark S Litwin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-10-02       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  When to perform bone scan in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: external validation of a novel risk stratification tool.

Authors:  Cosimo De Nunzio; Costantino Leonardo; Giorgio Franco; Francesco Esperto; Aldo Brassetti; Giovanni Simonelli; Dino Dente; Carlo De Dominicis; Andrea Tubaro
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-05-11       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  The crossroads of evidence-based medicine and health policy: implications for urology.

Authors:  Jeremy B Shelton; Christopher S Saigal
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  Prostate cancer imaging trends after a nationwide effort to discourage inappropriate prostate cancer imaging.

Authors:  Danil V Makarov; Stacy Loeb; David Ulmert; Linda Drevin; Mats Lambe; Pär Stattin
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Predictors of implantable pulse generator placement after sacral neuromodulation: who does better?

Authors:  Jennifer T Anger; Anne P Cameron; Rodger Madison; Christopher Saigal; J Quentin Clemens
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2013-09-18
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.