Literature DB >> 17709657

Distance to diagnosing provider as a measure of access for patients with melanoma.

Karyn B Stitzenberg1, Nancy E Thomas, Kathleen Dalton, Sarah E Brier, David W Ollila, Marianne Berwick, Dianne Mattingly, Robert C Millikan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of travel distance and other sociodemographic factors on access to a diagnosing provider for patients with melanoma.
DESIGN: Analysis was performed of all incident cases of melanoma in 2000 from 42 North Carolina counties.
SETTING: Academic research. PARTICIPANTS: Patients and providers from 42 North Carolina counties were geocoded to street address. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Associations between Breslow thickness and clinical and sociodemographic factors (age, sex, poverty rate, rurality, provider supply, and distance to diagnosing provider) were examined.
RESULTS: Of 643 eligible cases, 4.4% were excluded because of missing data. The median Breslow thickness was 0.6 mm (range, 0.1-20.0 mm). The median distance to diagnosing provider was 8 miles (range, 0-386 miles). For each 1-mile increase in distance, Breslow thickness increased by 0.6% (P =.003). For each 1% increase in poverty rate, Breslow thickness increased by 1% (P =.04). Breslow thickness was 19% greater for patients aged 51 to 80 years than for those aged 0 to 50 years (P =.02) and was 109% greater for patients older than 80 years than for those aged 0 to 50 years (P < .001). Sex, rurality, and supply of dermatologists were not associated with Breslow thickness.
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with melanoma, distance to the diagnosing provider is a meaningful measure of access that captures different information than community-level measures of rurality, provider supply, and socioeconomic status. Future work should be targeted at identifying factors that may affect distance to diagnosing provider and serve as barriers to melanoma care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17709657      PMCID: PMC3629703          DOI: 10.1001/archderm.143.8.991

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Dermatol        ISSN: 0003-987X


  33 in total

1.  Socioeconomic status and breast carcinoma survival in four racial/ethnic groups: a population-based study.

Authors:  Cynthia D O'Malley; Gem M Le; Sally L Glaser; Sarah J Shema; Dee W West
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2003-03-01       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Screening for cutaneous melanoma by skin self-examination.

Authors:  M Berwick; C B Begg; J A Fine; G C Roush; R L Barnhill
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1996-01-03       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  The effects of distance from primary treatment centers on survival among patients with multiple myeloma.

Authors:  R E Lenhard; J P Enterline; J Crowley; G Y Ho
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Increasing supplies of dermatologists and family physicians are associated with earlier stage of melanoma detection.

Authors:  R G Roetzheim; N Pal; D J van Durme; D Wathington; J M Ferrante; E C Gonzalez; J P Krischer
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 11.527

5.  Incidence and thickness of primary tumours and survival of patients with cutaneous malignant melanoma in relation to socioeconomic status.

Authors:  R M MacKie; D J Hole
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-04

6.  'The edge effect': an exploratory study of some factors affecting referrals to cancer genetic services in rural Wales.

Authors:  Rachel Iredale; Lesley Jones; Jonathon Gray; Jenny Deaville
Journal:  Health Place       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.078

7.  Prognostic factors analysis of 17,600 melanoma patients: validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system.

Authors:  C M Balch; S J Soong; J E Gershenwald; J F Thompson; D S Reintgen; N Cascinelli; M Urist; K M McMasters; M I Ross; J M Kirkwood; M B Atkins; J A Thompson; D G Coit; D Byrd; R Desmond; Y Zhang; P Y Liu; G H Lyman; A Morabito
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2001-08-15       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Correlation between prognostic factors and increasing age in melanoma.

Authors:  Celia Chao; Robert C G Martin; Merrick I Ross; Douglas S Reintgen; Michael J Edwards; R Dirk Noyes; Lee J Hagendoorn; Arnold J Stromberg; Kelly M McMasters
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  Clinical and dermatoscopic criteria for the preoperative evaluation of cutaneous melanoma thickness.

Authors:  G Argenziano; G Fabbrocini; P Carli; V De Giorgi; M Delfino
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 11.527

10.  Does palpability of primary cutaneous melanoma predict dermal invasion?

Authors:  B F O'Donnell; J R Marsden; C A O'Donnell; D S Sanders; C Billingham
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 11.527

View more
  25 in total

1.  Unusual documentation of the transformation of a nevus into malignant melanoma.

Authors:  Lindasusan Marcus; Robert Carlin; Neal Carlin
Journal:  J Clin Aesthet Dermatol       Date:  2009-01

Review 2.  Distance as a Barrier to Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment: Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Massimo Ambroggi; Claudia Biasini; Cinzia Del Giovane; Fabio Fornari; Luigi Cavanna
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2015-10-28

3.  Comparison of Dermatologist Density Between Urban and Rural Counties in the United States.

Authors:  Hao Feng; Juliana Berk-Krauss; Paula W Feng; Jennifer A Stein
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 10.282

4.  Association of Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics With Differences in Use of Outpatient Dermatology Services in the United States.

Authors:  Raghav Tripathi; Konrad D Knusel; Harib H Ezaldein; Jeffrey F Scott; Jeremy S Bordeaux
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 10.282

5.  Rural-Urban Differences in Cancer Incidence and Trends in the United States.

Authors:  Whitney E Zahnd; Aimee S James; Wiley D Jenkins; Sonya R Izadi; Amanda J Fogleman; David E Steward; Graham A Colditz; Laurent Brard
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  Travel time to provider is associated with advanced stage at diagnosis among low income head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients in North Carolina.

Authors:  Douglas R Farquhar; Maheer M Masood; Nicholas R Lenze; Philip McDaniel; Angela Mazul; Siddharth Sheth; Adam M Zanation; Trevor G Hackman; Mark Weissler; Jose P Zevallos; Andrew F Olshan
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 5.337

7.  The influence of travel time on breast cancer characteristics, receipt of primary therapy, and surveillance mammography.

Authors:  Tracy Onega; Andrea Cook; Beth Kirlin; Xun Shi; Jennifer Alford-Teaster; Leah Tuzzio; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-05-07       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 8.  Rural residence and cancer outcomes in the United States: issues and challenges.

Authors:  Ashley Meilleur; S V Subramanian; Jesse J Plascak; James L Fisher; Electra D Paskett; Elizabeth B Lamont
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Association between travel distance and metastatic disease at diagnosis among patients with colon cancer.

Authors:  Nader N Massarweh; Yi-Ju Chiang; Yan Xing; George J Chang; Alex B Haynes; Y Nancy You; Barry W Feig; Janice N Cormier
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-02-10       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  The association of physician-specialty density and melanoma prognosis in the United States, 1988 to 1993.

Authors:  Melody J Eide; Martin A Weinstock; Melissa A Clark
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2008-10-19       Impact factor: 11.527

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.