Literature DB >> 21620446

Impact of payer status on treatment of cervical cancer at a tertiary referral center.

Kimberly L Levinson1, Robert E Bristow, Pamela K Donohue, Norma F Kanarek, Cornelia L Trimble.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The study aims to determine the impact of payer status on the likelihood of receiving definitive treatment for invasive cervical cancer at a tertiary medical center.
METHODS: All consecutive patients presenting to Johns Hopkins Hospital with a diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer between 1/1/95-12/31/08 were retrospectively identified from the tumor registry. Demographic and clinical information were abstracted from the medical record. Payer status was categorized as private, public, no insurance, or unknown. Treatment was defined as surgery, chemo-radiation, chemotherapy, radiation, or no definitive therapy. The likelihood of receiving no definitive therapy was analyzed using Pearson chi-square analysis, univariate and multivariate models.
RESULTS: A total of 306 patients were identified. Median age was 47 and 60% of patients had early stage disease at diagnosis (stages IA-IIA). Fifty-six percent of the cohort had private insurance, 34% had public insurance, and 6% had no insurance. Having no insurance was the single most significant risk factor associated with receiving no standard therapy. While 7% of privately insured and 4% of publicly insured patients did not receive definitive therapy, 16% of uninsured patients did not receive definitive treatment. In multivariate analysis controlling for age, race, stage, histology, and comorbidities, uninsured payer status was a significant and independent predictor of receiving no definitive treatment (OR 8.01, CI 1.265-50.694, p=0.027) than patients with public insurance.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, uninsured payer status was significantly associated with a higher likelihood of not receiving standard therapy for cervical cancer. Additional studies are warranted to characterize specific barriers to care for this at-risk population. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21620446      PMCID: PMC4612589          DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.04.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  18 in total

Review 1.  Racial and ethnic disparities in the receipt of cancer treatment.

Authors:  Vickie L Shavers; Martin L Brown
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2002-03-06       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  The contribution of insurance coverage and community resources to reducing racial/ethnic disparities in access to care.

Authors:  J Lee Hargraves; Jack Hadley
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 3.  The disparity of cervical cancer in diverse populations.

Authors:  Levi S Downs; Jennifer S Smith; Isabel Scarinci; Lisa Flowers; Groesbeck Parham
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Insurance status and the use of guideline therapy in the treatment of selected cancers.

Authors:  Linda C Harlan; Amanda L Greene; Limin X Clegg; Margaret Mooney; Jennifer L Stevens; Martin L Brown
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-11-21       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Disparities in cancer diagnosis and survival.

Authors:  C J Bradley; C W Given; C Roberts
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2001-01-01       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  The importance of health insurance as a determinant of cancer screening: evidence from the Women's Health Initiative.

Authors:  J Hsia; E Kemper; C Kiefe; J Zapka; S Sofaer; M Pettinger; D Bowen; M Limacher; L Lillington; E Mason
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.018

7.  Medicaid status and stage at diagnosis of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Cynthia D O'Malley; Sarah J Shema; Lisa S Clarke; Christina A Clarke; Carin I Perkins
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Ethnic disparities in cervical cancer illness burden and subsequent care: a prospective view in managed care.

Authors:  Jennifer S Smith
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.229

Review 9.  Cancer disparities by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

Authors:  Elizabeth Ward; Ahmedin Jemal; Vilma Cokkinides; Gopal K Singh; Cheryll Cardinez; Asma Ghafoor; Michael Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 508.702

10.  Social factors affecting treatment of cervical cancer: ethical issues and policy implications.

Authors:  Shannon N Westin; Dan Bustillos; Jacalyn B Gano; Margaret M Fields; Ann L Coker; Charlotte C Sun; Lois M Ramondetta
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 7.661

View more
  3 in total

1.  Disparities in the management and outcome of cervical cancer in the United States according to health insurance status.

Authors:  Thomas Churilla; Brian Egleston; Yanqun Dong; Talha Shaikh; Colin Murphy; Gina Mantia-Smaldone; Christina Chu; Stephen Rubin; Penny Anderson
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Basic social resource needs screening in the gynecologic oncology clinic: a quality improvement initiative.

Authors:  Anna Louise Beavis; Awa Sanneh; Rebecca L Stone; Margaret Vitale; Kimberly Levinson; Anne F Rositch; Amanda Nickles Fader; Kristin Topel; Ashley Abing; Stephanie L Wethington
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-05-17       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Recent trends in racial and regional disparities in cervical cancer incidence and mortality in United States.

Authors:  Wonsuk Yoo; Sangmi Kim; Warner K Huh; Sarah Dilley; Steven S Coughlin; Edward E Partridge; Yunmi Chung; Vivian Dicks; Jae-Kwan Lee; Sejong Bae
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.