Literature DB >> 22492890

Appropriate and inappropriate imaging rates for prostate cancer go hand in hand by region, as if set by thermostat.

Danil V Makarov1, Rani Desai, James B Yu, Richa Sharma, Nitya Abraham, Peter C Albertsen, Harlan M Krumholz, David F Penson, Cary P Gross.   

Abstract

Policy makers interested in containing health care costs are targeting regional variation in utilization, including the use of advanced imaging. However, bluntly decreasing utilization among the highest-utilization regions may have negative consequences. In a cross-sectional study of prostate cancer patients from 2004 to 2005, we found that regions with lower rates of inappropriate imaging also had lower rates of appropriate imaging. Similarly, regions with higher overall imaging rates tended to have not only higher rates of inappropriate imaging, but also higher rates of appropriate imaging. In fact, men with high-risk prostate cancer were more likely to receive appropriate imaging if they resided in areas with higher rates of inappropriate imaging. This "thermostat model" of regional health care utilization suggests that poorly designed policies aimed at reducing inappropriate imaging could limit access to appropriate imaging for high-risk patients. Health care organizations need clearly defined quality metrics and supportive systems to encourage appropriate treatment for patients and to ensure that cost containment does not occur at the expense of quality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22492890     DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0336

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)        ISSN: 0278-2715            Impact factor:   6.301


  16 in total

1.  Factors associated with potentially inappropriate medication use in community-dwelling older adults in the United States: a systematic review.

Authors:  Stephanie K Nothelle; Ritu Sharma; Allison Oakes; Madeline Jackson; Jodi B Segal
Journal:  Int J Pharm Pract       Date:  2019-04-09

Review 2.  Overuse of Health Care Services in the Management of Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Shrujal S Baxi; Minal Kale; Salomeh Keyhani; Benjamin R Roman; Annie Yang; Antonio P Derosa; Deborah Korenstein
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  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

Review 4.  Utilization of Prostate Cancer Quality Metrics for Research and Quality Improvement: A Structured Review.

Authors:  Davide Gori; Rajendra Dulal; Douglas W Blayney; James D Brooks; Maria P Fantini; Kathryn M McDonald; Tina Hernandez-Boussard
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2018-09-18

Review 5.  Imaging and evaluation of patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Luis S Beltran; Roy A Raad; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 6.  Determinants of the overuse of imaging in low-risk prostate cancer: A systematic review.

Authors:  Allison H Oakes; Ritu Sharma; Madeline Jackson; Jodi B Segal
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 3.498

7.  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

8.  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

9.  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

10.  Cancer-specific survival after metastasis following primary radical prostatectomy compared with radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients: results of a population-based, propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Yu-Hsuan Joni Shao; Sung Kim; Dirk F Moore; Weichung Shih; Yong Lin; Mark Stein; Isaac Yi Kim; Grace L Lu-Yao
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.