Kevin A Matthews1, Amanda R Kahl2, Anne H Gaglioti3, Mary E Charlton2. 1. Division of Population Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Iowa Cancer Registry, University of Iowa College of Public Health, Iowa City, Iowa. 3. National Center for Primary Care, Department of Family Medicine, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Rectal cancer is rarer than colon cancer and is a technically more difficult tumor for surgeons to remove, thus rectal cancer patients may travel longer for specialized treatment compared to colon cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether travel time for surgery was different for colon versus rectal cancer patients. METHODS: A secondary data analysis of colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence data from the Iowa Cancer Registry data was conducted. Travel times along a street network from all residential ZIP Codes to all cancer surgery facilities were calculated using a geographic information system. A new method for analyzing "time-to-place" data using the same type of survival analysis method commonly used to analyze "time-to-event" data is introduced. Cox proportional hazard model was used to analyze travel time differences for colon versus rectal cancer patients. RESULTS: A total of 5,844 CRC patients met inclusion criteria. Median travel time to the nearest surgical facility was 9 minutes, median travel time to the actual cancer surgery facilities was 22 minutes, and the median number of facilities bypassed was 3. Although travel times to the nearest surgery facilities were not significantly different for colon versus rectal cancer patients, rectal cancer patients on average traveled 15 minutes longer to their actual surgery facility and bypassed 2 more facilities to obtain surgery. DISCUSSION: In general, the survival analysis method used to analyze the time-to-place data as described here could be applied to a wide variety of health services and used to compare travel patterns among different groups.
PURPOSE: Rectal cancer is rarer than colon cancer and is a technically more difficult tumor for surgeons to remove, thus rectal cancer patients may travel longer for specialized treatment compared to colon cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether travel time for surgery was different for colon versus rectal cancer patients. METHODS: A secondary data analysis of colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence data from the Iowa Cancer Registry data was conducted. Travel times along a street network from all residential ZIP Codes to all cancer surgery facilities were calculated using a geographic information system. A new method for analyzing "time-to-place" data using the same type of survival analysis method commonly used to analyze "time-to-event" data is introduced. Cox proportional hazard model was used to analyze travel time differences for colon versus rectal cancer patients. RESULTS: A total of 5,844 CRC patients met inclusion criteria. Median travel time to the nearest surgical facility was 9 minutes, median travel time to the actual cancer surgery facilities was 22 minutes, and the median number of facilities bypassed was 3. Although travel times to the nearest surgery facilities were not significantly different for colon versus rectal cancer patients, rectal cancer patients on average traveled 15 minutes longer to their actual surgery facility and bypassed 2 more facilities to obtain surgery. DISCUSSION: In general, the survival analysis method used to analyze the time-to-place data as described here could be applied to a wide variety of health services and used to compare travel patterns among different groups.
Authors: Mary E Charlton; Kevin A Matthews; Anne Gaglioti; Camden Bay; Bradley D McDowell; Marcia M Ward; Barcey T Levy Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2015-11-26 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Esther K Wei; Edward Giovannucci; Kana Wu; Bernard Rosner; Charles S Fuchs; Walter C Willett; Graham A Colditz Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2004-01-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: K Y Yoo; K Tajima; M Inoue; T Takezaki; K Hirose; N Hamajima; S K Park; D H Kang; T Kato; T Hirai Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Jennifer Alford-Teaster; Jane M Lange; Rebecca A Hubbard; Christoph I Lee; Jennifer S Haas; Xun Shi; Heather A Carlos; Louise Henderson; Deirdre Hill; Anna N A Tosteson; Tracy Onega Journal: Int J Health Geogr Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 3.918
Authors: C L Deijen; A Tsai; T W A Koedam; M Veltcamp Helbach; C Sietses; A M Lacy; H J Bonjer; J B Tuynman Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2016-11-16 Impact factor: 3.781