BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is increasingly common and poised to become the second leading cause of cancer deaths by the year 2020. Surgical resection is the only chance for cure, yet significant disparities in resection rates exist by insurance status. The 2006 Massachusetts health care reform serves as natural experiment to evaluate the unknown impact of health insurance expansion on treatment of pancreatic cancer. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's State Inpatient Databases, this cohort study examines nonelderly, adult patients with no insurance, private coverage, or government-subsidized insurance plans, who were admitted with pancreatic cancer in Massachusetts and 3 control states. The primary end point was change in pancreatic resection rates. Difference-in-difference models were used to show the impact of Massachusetts health care reform on resection rates for pancreatic cancer, controlling for confounding factors and secular trends. RESULTS: Before the Massachusetts reform, government-subsidized and self-pay patients had significantly lower rates of resection than privately insured patients. The 2006 Massachusetts health reform was associated with a 15% increased rate of admission with pancreatic cancer (p = 0.043) and a 67% increased rate of surgical resection (p = 0.043) compared with control states. Measured disparities in likelihood of resection by insurance status decreased in Massachusetts and remained unchanged in control states. CONCLUSIONS: The 2006 Massachusetts health care reform was associated with increased resection rates for pancreatic cancer compared with control states. Our findings provide hopeful evidence that increased insurance coverage can help improve equity in pancreatic cancer treatment. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the longevity of these findings and generalizability in other states.
BACKGROUND:Pancreatic cancer is increasingly common and poised to become the second leading cause of cancer deaths by the year 2020. Surgical resection is the only chance for cure, yet significant disparities in resection rates exist by insurance status. The 2006 Massachusetts health care reform serves as natural experiment to evaluate the unknown impact of health insurance expansion on treatment of pancreatic cancer. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's State Inpatient Databases, this cohort study examines nonelderly, adult patients with no insurance, private coverage, or government-subsidized insurance plans, who were admitted with pancreatic cancer in Massachusetts and 3 control states. The primary end point was change in pancreatic resection rates. Difference-in-difference models were used to show the impact of Massachusetts health care reform on resection rates for pancreatic cancer, controlling for confounding factors and secular trends. RESULTS: Before the Massachusetts reform, government-subsidized and self-pay patients had significantly lower rates of resection than privately insured patients. The 2006 Massachusetts health reform was associated with a 15% increased rate of admission with pancreatic cancer (p = 0.043) and a 67% increased rate of surgical resection (p = 0.043) compared with control states. Measured disparities in likelihood of resection by insurance status decreased in Massachusetts and remained unchanged in control states. CONCLUSIONS: The 2006 Massachusetts health care reform was associated with increased resection rates for pancreatic cancer compared with control states. Our findings provide hopeful evidence that increased insurance coverage can help improve equity in pancreatic cancer treatment. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the longevity of these findings and generalizability in other states.
Authors: Waddah B Al-Refaie; Binyam Muluneh; Wei Zhong; Helen M Parsons; Todd M Tuttle; Selwyn M Vickers; Elizabeth B Habermann Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2011-11-23 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Mark J Truty; Ryan M Thomas; Matthew H Katz; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Christopher Crane; Gaury R Varadhachary; Robert A Wolff; James L Abbruzzese; Jeffrey E Lee; Jason B Fleming Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-05-18 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Ioannis T Konstantinidis; Abdulmetin Dursun; Hui Zheng; Jennifer A Wargo; Sarah P Thayer; Carlos Fernandez-del Castillo; Andrew L Warshaw; Cristina R Ferrone Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: David C Chang; Yiyi Zhang; Debraj Mukherjee; Christopher L Wolfgang; Richard D Schulick; John L Cameron; Nita Ahuja Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Michael T Halpern; Elizabeth M Ward; Alexandre L Pavluck; Nicole M Schrag; John Bian; Amy Y Chen Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2008-02-20 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Elizabeth Ward; Michael Halpern; Nicole Schrag; Vilma Cokkinides; Carol DeSantis; Priti Bandi; Rebecca Siegel; Andrew Stewart; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2007-12-20 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Anasooya Abraham; Waddah B Al-Refaie; Helen M Parsons; Vikas Dudeja; Selwyn M Vickers; Elizabeth B Habermann Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2013-04-12 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Andrew P Loehrer; Zirui Song; Alex B Haynes; David C Chang; Matthew M Hutter; John T Mullen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Erin M Mobley; Ian Tfirn; Christina Guerrier; Michael S Gutter; Kim Vigal; Keouna Pather; Brett Baskovich; Ziad T Awad; Alexander S Parker Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2022-01-01 Impact factor: 6.532
Authors: Richard S Hoehn; Caroline J Rieser; Heather Phelos; Lindsay M Sabik; Ibrahim Nassour; Alessandro Paniccia; Amer H Zureikat; Samer T Tohme Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 6.532