HyounKyoung G Park, Zhixin E Wang, Chenguang Wang, Warner K Huh, Sejong Bae
{"title":"按医疗机构类型分列的宫颈癌结果:2004-2015年国家癌症数据库。","authors":"HyounKyoung G Park, Zhixin E Wang, Chenguang Wang, Warner K Huh, Sejong Bae","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2015 was analyzed to identify cervical cancer outcomes associated with demographic and clinical characteristics measured by types of facility. Chi-Square tests were used to compare proportions and logistic regression to determine factors associated with cervical cancer outcomes. Women treated at Academic/Research Programs (ARPs) were younger at diagnosis, more likely black, less educated and more in Stage 2, lived further away from treatment facilities, had less comorbidities and better 5-year survival, and were more likely to be alive at 30 and 90 days after surgery compared to other programs. Women treated at Community Cancer Programs were more likely 75 and older at diagnosis, more likely to receive radiation treatment and more in Stage 4, more living in rural areas and less than 10 miles from the facility, and had more comorbidities, and lower 5-year survival compared to other programs. Women treated at Comprehensive Community Cancer Programs were more likely white and educated, had more private insurance, and underwent surgery. Women treated at Integrated Network Cancer Programs were more likely to live in urban, south region, and in Stage 1B2, had more surgery and one comorbidity, and died fewer than 30 days after surgery. The type of facility and treatment had varied effects on mortality and 5-year survival. Considering the different cervical cancer outcomes from different health care facilities, further research is needed to identify what factors influence women to choose a health care facility for their treatment and how this choice can affect different health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72512,"journal":{"name":"Cancer health disparities","volume":"4 ","pages":"e1-e13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8136613/pdf/nihms-1034624.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cervical cancer outcome by type of health care facilities: National Cancer Database, 2004-2015.\",\"authors\":\"HyounKyoung G Park, Zhixin E Wang, Chenguang Wang, Warner K Huh, Sejong Bae\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2015 was analyzed to identify cervical cancer outcomes associated with demographic and clinical characteristics measured by types of facility. Chi-Square tests were used to compare proportions and logistic regression to determine factors associated with cervical cancer outcomes. Women treated at Academic/Research Programs (ARPs) were younger at diagnosis, more likely black, less educated and more in Stage 2, lived further away from treatment facilities, had less comorbidities and better 5-year survival, and were more likely to be alive at 30 and 90 days after surgery compared to other programs. Women treated at Community Cancer Programs were more likely 75 and older at diagnosis, more likely to receive radiation treatment and more in Stage 4, more living in rural areas and less than 10 miles from the facility, and had more comorbidities, and lower 5-year survival compared to other programs. Women treated at Comprehensive Community Cancer Programs were more likely white and educated, had more private insurance, and underwent surgery. Women treated at Integrated Network Cancer Programs were more likely to live in urban, south region, and in Stage 1B2, had more surgery and one comorbidity, and died fewer than 30 days after surgery. The type of facility and treatment had varied effects on mortality and 5-year survival. Considering the different cervical cancer outcomes from different health care facilities, further research is needed to identify what factors influence women to choose a health care facility for their treatment and how this choice can affect different health outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72512,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer health disparities\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"e1-e13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8136613/pdf/nihms-1034624.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer health disparities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/4/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer health disparities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/4/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cervical cancer outcome by type of health care facilities: National Cancer Database, 2004-2015.
The National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2015 was analyzed to identify cervical cancer outcomes associated with demographic and clinical characteristics measured by types of facility. Chi-Square tests were used to compare proportions and logistic regression to determine factors associated with cervical cancer outcomes. Women treated at Academic/Research Programs (ARPs) were younger at diagnosis, more likely black, less educated and more in Stage 2, lived further away from treatment facilities, had less comorbidities and better 5-year survival, and were more likely to be alive at 30 and 90 days after surgery compared to other programs. Women treated at Community Cancer Programs were more likely 75 and older at diagnosis, more likely to receive radiation treatment and more in Stage 4, more living in rural areas and less than 10 miles from the facility, and had more comorbidities, and lower 5-year survival compared to other programs. Women treated at Comprehensive Community Cancer Programs were more likely white and educated, had more private insurance, and underwent surgery. Women treated at Integrated Network Cancer Programs were more likely to live in urban, south region, and in Stage 1B2, had more surgery and one comorbidity, and died fewer than 30 days after surgery. The type of facility and treatment had varied effects on mortality and 5-year survival. Considering the different cervical cancer outcomes from different health care facilities, further research is needed to identify what factors influence women to choose a health care facility for their treatment and how this choice can affect different health outcomes.