F Benjamin Zhan1,2, Niaz Morshed3, Nicole Kluz4, Bretta Candelaria4, Eda Baykal-Caglar5, Anjum Khurshid4, Michael P Pignone1,4. 1. LiveStrong Cancer Institutes, Dell Medical School, University of Texas, Austin, Texas. 2. Texas Center for Geographic Information Science, Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666. Email: zhan@txstate.edu. 3. Texas Center for Geographic Information Science, Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas. 4. Departments of Internal Medicine and Population Health, University of Texas Dell Medical School, Austin, Texas. 5. CommUnityCare, Federally Qualified Health Centers, Austin, Texas.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can reduce morbidity and mortality; however, important disparities exist in CRC uptake. Our study examines the associations of distance to care and frequency of using primary care and screening. METHODS: To examine the distribution of screening geographically and according to several demographic features, we used individual patient-level data, dated September 30, 2018, from a large urban safety-net health system in Central Texas. We used spatial cluster analysis and logistic regression adjusted for age, race, sex, socioeconomic status, and health insurance status. RESULTS: We obtained screening status data for 13,079 age-eligible patients from the health system's electronic medical records. Of those eligible, 55.1% were female, and 55.9% identified as Hispanic. Mean age was 58.1 years. Patients residing more than 20 miles from one of the system's primary care clinics was associated with lower screening rates (odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.93). Patients with higher screening rates included those who had a greater number of primary care-related (nonspecialty) visits within 1 year (OR, 6.90; 95% CI, 6.04-7.88) and those who were part of the county-level medical assistance program (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.40-1.84). Spatial analysis identified an area where the level of CRC screening was particularly low. CONCLUSION: Distance to primary care and use of primary care were associated with screening. Priorities in targeted interventions should include identifying and inviting patients with limited care engagements.
INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can reduce morbidity and mortality; however, important disparities exist in CRC uptake. Our study examines the associations of distance to care and frequency of using primary care and screening. METHODS: To examine the distribution of screening geographically and according to several demographic features, we used individual patient-level data, dated September 30, 2018, from a large urban safety-net health system in Central Texas. We used spatial cluster analysis and logistic regression adjusted for age, race, sex, socioeconomic status, and health insurance status. RESULTS: We obtained screening status data for 13,079 age-eligible patients from the health system's electronic medical records. Of those eligible, 55.1% were female, and 55.9% identified as Hispanic. Mean age was 58.1 years. Patients residing more than 20 miles from one of the system's primary care clinics was associated with lower screening rates (odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.93). Patients with higher screening rates included those who had a greater number of primary care-related (nonspecialty) visits within 1 year (OR, 6.90; 95% CI, 6.04-7.88) and those who were part of the county-level medical assistance program (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.40-1.84). Spatial analysis identified an area where the level of CRC screening was particularly low. CONCLUSION: Distance to primary care and use of primary care were associated with screening. Priorities in targeted interventions should include identifying and inviting patients with limited care engagements.
Authors: Katherine Ni; Kelli O'Connell; Sanya Anand; Stephanie C Yakoubovitch; Simona C Kwon; Rabia Ali de Latour; Andrew B Wallach; Scott E Sherman; Mengmeng Du; Peter S Liang Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2020-02-03
Authors: Michael K Dougherty; Alison T Brenner; Seth D Crockett; Shivani Gupta; Stephanie B Wheeler; Manny Coker-Schwimmer; Laura Cubillos; Teri Malo; Daniel S Reuland Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Melinda M Davis; Michele Freeman; Jackilen Shannon; Gloria D Coronado; Kurt C Stange; Jeanne-Marie Guise; Stephanie B Wheeler; David I Buckley Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2018-01-06 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Mesnad Alyabsi; Mary Charlton; Jane Meza; K M Monirul Islam; Amr Soliman; Shinobu Watanabe-Galloway Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Djenaba A Joseph; Jessica B King; Nicole F Dowling; Cheryll C Thomas; Lisa C Richardson Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2020-03-13 Impact factor: 17.586