Cathy J Bradley1, Bassam Dahman, Charles W Given. 1. Department of Health Administration and Massey Cancer Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, 1008 Clay Street, Richmond, VA 23298-0203, USA. cjbradley@vcu.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the likelihood of seeing a surgeon between elderly dually eligible non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and colon cancer patients and their Medicare counterparts. Surgery rates between dually eligible and Medicare patients who were evaluated by a surgeon were also assessed. METHODS: We used statewide Medicaid and Medicare data merged with the Michigan Tumor Registry to extract a sample of patients with a first primary NSCLC (n = 1100) or colon cancer (n = 2086). The study period was from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2000. We assessed the likelihood of a surgical evaluation using logistic models that included patient characteristics, tumor stage, and census tracts. Among patients evaluated by a surgeon, we used logistic regression to predict if a resection was performed. RESULTS: Dually eligible patients were nearly half as likely to be evaluated by a surgeon as Medicare patients (odds ratio [OR] = 0.49; 95% confidence interval = 0.32, 0.77 and odds ratio = 0.59; 95% confidence interval = 0.41, 0.86 for NSCLC and colon cancer patients, respectively). Among patients who were evaluated by a surgeon, the likelihood of resection was not statistically significantly different between dually eligible and Medicare patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that dually eligible patients, in spite of having Medicaid insurance, are less likely to be evaluated by a surgeon relative to their Medicare counterparts. Policies and interventions aimed toward increasing access to specialists and complete diagnostic work-ups (eg, colonoscopy, bronchoscopy) are needed.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the likelihood of seeing a surgeon between elderly dually eligible non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and colon cancerpatients and their Medicare counterparts. Surgery rates between dually eligible and Medicare patients who were evaluated by a surgeon were also assessed. METHODS: We used statewide Medicaid and Medicare data merged with the Michigan Tumor Registry to extract a sample of patients with a first primary NSCLC (n = 1100) or colon cancer (n = 2086). The study period was from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2000. We assessed the likelihood of a surgical evaluation using logistic models that included patient characteristics, tumor stage, and census tracts. Among patients evaluated by a surgeon, we used logistic regression to predict if a resection was performed. RESULTS: Dually eligible patients were nearly half as likely to be evaluated by a surgeon as Medicare patients (odds ratio [OR] = 0.49; 95% confidence interval = 0.32, 0.77 and odds ratio = 0.59; 95% confidence interval = 0.41, 0.86 for NSCLC and colon cancerpatients, respectively). Among patients who were evaluated by a surgeon, the likelihood of resection was not statistically significantly different between dually eligible and Medicare patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that dually eligible patients, in spite of having Medicaid insurance, are less likely to be evaluated by a surgeon relative to their Medicare counterparts. Policies and interventions aimed toward increasing access to specialists and complete diagnostic work-ups (eg, colonoscopy, bronchoscopy) are needed.
Authors: Joan L Warren; Eboneé N Butler; Jennifer Stevens; Christopher S Lathan; Anne-Michelle Noone; Kevin C Ward; Linda C Harlan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-12-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joan J Ryoo; Diana L Ordin; Anna Liza M Antonio; Sabine M Oishi; Michael K Gould; Steven M Asch; Jennifer L Malin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-06-10 Impact factor: 44.544