Michael J Hassett1,2, Maria J Schymura3, Kun Chen1, Francis P Boscoe3, Foster C Gesten4, Deborah Schrag1,2. 1. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Cancer Registry, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York. 4. Office of Quality and Patient Safety, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities persist in part because our current understanding of the care provided to minority and disadvantaged populations is limited. The authors evaluated the quality of breast cancer care in 2 large states to understand the disparities experienced by African Americans, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders (APIs), and Medicaid enrollees and to prioritize remediation strategies. METHODS: Statewide cancer registry data for 80,436 women in New York and 121,233 women in California who were diagnosed during 2004 to 2009 with stage 0 through III breast cancer were used to assess underuse and overuse of surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and hormone therapy based on 34 quality measures. Concordance values were compared across racial/ethnic and Medicaid-enrollment groups. Multivariable models were used to quantify disparities across groups for each treatment in each state. RESULTS: Overall concordance was 76% for underuse measures and 87% for overuse measures. The proportions of patients who received care concordant with all relevant measures were 35% in New York and 33% in California. Compared with whites, African Americans were less likely to receive recommended surgery, radiation, and hormone therapy; Hispanics and APIs were usually more likely to receive recommended chemotherapy. Across states, the same racial/ethnic groups did not always experience the same disparities. Medicaid enrollment was associated with decreased likelihood of receiving all recommended treatments, except chemotherapy, in both states. Overuse was evident for hormone therapy and axillary surgery but was not associated with race/ethnicity or Medicaid enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-level measures of quality identify substantial problems with care quality and meaningful disparities. Remediating these problems will require prioritizing low-performing measures and targeting high-risk populations, possibly in different ways for different regions.
BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities persist in part because our current understanding of the care provided to minority and disadvantaged populations is limited. The authors evaluated the quality of breast cancer care in 2 large states to understand the disparities experienced by African Americans, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders (APIs), and Medicaid enrollees and to prioritize remediation strategies. METHODS: Statewide cancer registry data for 80,436 women in New York and 121,233 women in California who were diagnosed during 2004 to 2009 with stage 0 through III breast cancer were used to assess underuse and overuse of surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and hormone therapy based on 34 quality measures. Concordance values were compared across racial/ethnic and Medicaid-enrollment groups. Multivariable models were used to quantify disparities across groups for each treatment in each state. RESULTS: Overall concordance was 76% for underuse measures and 87% for overuse measures. The proportions of patients who received care concordant with all relevant measures were 35% in New York and 33% in California. Compared with whites, African Americans were less likely to receive recommended surgery, radiation, and hormone therapy; Hispanics and APIs were usually more likely to receive recommended chemotherapy. Across states, the same racial/ethnic groups did not always experience the same disparities. Medicaid enrollment was associated with decreased likelihood of receiving all recommended treatments, except chemotherapy, in both states. Overuse was evident for hormone therapy and axillary surgery but was not associated with race/ethnicity or Medicaid enrollment. CONCLUSIONS:Patient-level measures of quality identify substantial problems with care quality and meaningful disparities. Remediating these problems will require prioritizing low-performing measures and targeting high-risk populations, possibly in different ways for different regions.
Authors: Rachel L Yung; Michael J Hassett; Kun Chen; Foster C Gesten; Patrick J Roohan; Francis P Boscoe; Amber H Sinclair; Maria J Schymura; Deborah Schrag Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-07-06 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Linda C Harlan; Jeffrey Abrams; Joan L Warren; Lin Clegg; Jennifer Stevens; Rachel Ballard-Barbash Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-04-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Robert R German; Jennifer M Wike; Katrina R Bauer; Steven T Fleming; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Mary Namiak; Lyn Almon; Karen Knight; Carin Perkins Journal: J Registry Manag Date: 2011
Authors: Katherine Mallin; Bryan E Palis; Nancy Watroba; Andrew K Stewart; Daniel Walczak; Joseph Singer; John Barron; Wendy Blumenthal; Georgette Haydu; Stephen B Edge Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2013-01-26 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Jeffrey H Silber; Paul R Rosenbaum; Amy S Clark; Bruce J Giantonio; Richard N Ross; Yun Teng; Min Wang; Bijan A Niknam; Justin M Ludwig; Wei Wang; Orit Even-Shoshan; Kevin R Fox Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-07-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: David Reeves; Stephen M Campbell; John Adams; Paul G Shekelle; Evan Kontopantelis; Martin O Roland Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: E C Inwald; M Koller; M Klinkhammer-Schalke; F Zeman; F Hofstädter; P Lindberg; M Gerstenhauer; S Schüler; O Treeck; O Ortmann Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Justin G Trogdon; Donatus U Ekwueme; Diana Poehler; Cheryll C Thomas; Katherine Reeder-Hayes; Benjamin T Allaire Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-07-12 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Vanessa B Sheppard; Luciane R Cavalli; Chiranjeev Dash; Yasmine M Kanaan; Asma A Dilawari; Sara Horton; Kepher H Makambi Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Susan Eggly; Lauren M Hamel; Tanina S Foster; Terrance L Albrecht; Robert Chapman; Felicity W K Harper; Hayley Thompson; Jennifer J Griggs; Richard Gonzalez; Lisa Berry-Bobovski; Rifky Tkatch; Michael Simon; Anthony Shields; Shirish Gadgeel; Randa Loutfi; Haythem Ali; Ira Wollner; Louis A Penner Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2016-12-27
Authors: Aishwarya Kulkarni; Antoinette M Stroup; Lisa E Paddock; Stephanie M Hill; Jesse J Plascak; Adana A M Llanos Journal: Cancer Health Disparities Date: 2019-08-19
Authors: Louis A Penner; John F Dovidio; Richard Gonzalez; Terrance L Albrecht; Robert Chapman; Tanina Foster; Felicity W K Harper; Nao Hagiwara; Lauren M Hamel; Anthony F Shields; Shirish Gadgeel; Michael S Simon; Jennifer J Griggs; Susan Eggly Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Shoshana Adler Jaffe; Orrin Myers; Angela L W Meisner; Charles L Wiggins; Deirdre A Hill; Jean A McDougall Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2019-12-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Jacqueline Bachand; Pamela R Soulos; Jeph Herrin; Craig E Pollack; Xiao Xu; Xiaomei Ma; Cary P Gross Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 4.872