Article

Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status and Use of Colonoscopy in an Insured Population – A Retrospective Cohort Study

The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, United States of America
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.53). 05/2012; 7(5):e36392. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036392
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Low-socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with a higher colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Screening with colonoscopy, the most commonly used test in the US, has been shown to reduce the risk of death from CRC. This study examined if, among insured persons receiving care in integrated healthcare delivery systems, differences exist in colonoscopy use according to neighborhood SES.
We assembled a retrospective cohort of 100,566 men and women, 50-74 years old, who had been enrolled in one of three US health plans for ≥1 year on January 1, 2000. Subjects were followed until the date of first colonoscopy, date of disenrollment from the health plan, or December 31, 2007, whichever occurred first. We obtained data on colonoscopy use from administrative records. We defined screening colonoscopy as an examination that was not preceded by gastrointestinal conditions in the prior 6-month period. Neighborhood SES was measured using the percentage of households in each subject's census-tract with an income below 1999 federal poverty levels based on 2000 US census data. Analyses, adjusted for demographics and comorbidity index, were performed using Weibull regression models.
The average age of the cohort was 60 years and 52.7% were female. During 449,738 person-years of follow-up, fewer subjects in the lowest SES quartile (Q1) compared to the highest quartile (Q4) had any colonoscopy (26.7% vs. 37.1%) or a screening colonoscopy (7.6% vs. 13.3%). In regression analyses, compared to Q4, subjects in Q1 were 16% (adjusted HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.80-0.88) less likely to undergo any colonoscopy and 30%(adjusted HR = 0.70, CI: 0.65-0.75) less likely to undergo a screening colonoscopy.
People in lower-SES neighborhoods are less likely to undergo a colonoscopy, even among insured subjects receiving care in integrated healthcare systems. Removing health insurance barriers alone is unlikely to eliminate disparities in colonoscopy use.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Margaret Gunter, Aug 22, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
231 Views
  • Source
    Digestive Diseases and Sciences 10/2012; DOI:10.1007/s10620-012-2418-7 · 2.55 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The value of lymphadenectomy in most localized gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies is well established. Our objectives were to evaluate the time trends of lymphadenectomy in GI cancer and identify factors associated with inadequate lymphadenectomy in a large population-based sample. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Database (1998-2009), a total of 326,243 patients with surgically treated GI malignancy (esophagus, 13,165; stomach, 18,858; small bowel, 7,666; colon, 232,345; rectum, 42,338; pancreas, 12,141) were identified. Adequate lymphadenectomy was defined based on the National Cancer Center Network's recommendations as more than 15 esophagus, 15 stomach, 12 small bowel, 12 colon, 12 rectum, and 15 pancreas. The median number of lymph nodes removed and the prevalence of adequate and/or no lymphadenectomy for each cancer type were assessed and trended over the ten study years. Multivariate logistic regression was employed to identify factors predicting adequate lymphadenectomy. RESULTS: The median number of excised nodes improved over the decade of study in all types of cancer: esophagus, from 7 to 13; stomach, 8-12; small bowel, 2-7; colon, 9-16; rectum, 8-13; and pancreas, 7-13. Furthermore, the percentage of patients with an adequate lymphadenectomy (49 % for all types) steadily increased, and those with zero nodes removed (6 % for all types) steadily decreased in all types of cancer, although both remained far from ideal. By 2009, the percentages of patients with adequate lymphadenectomy were 43 % for esophagus, 42 % for stomach, 35 % for small intestine, 77 % for colon, 61 % for rectum, and 42 % for pancreas. Men, patients >65 years old, or those undergoing surgical therapy earlier in the study period and living in areas with high poverty rates were significantly less likely to receive adequate lymphadenectomy (all p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Lymph node retrieval during surgery for GI cancer remains inadequate in a large proportion of patients in the USA, although the median number of resected nodes increased over the last 10 years. Gender and socioeconomic disparities in receiving adequate lymphadenectomy were observed.
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 01/2013; 17(4). DOI:10.1007/s11605-013-2146-0 · 2.39 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chinese translation The effectiveness of screening colonoscopy in average-risk adults is uncertain, particularly for right colon cancer. To examine the association between screening colonoscopy and risk for incident late-stage colorectal cancer (CRC). Nested case-control study. Four U.S. health plans. 1039 average-risk adults enrolled for at least 5 years in one of the health plans. Case patients were aged 55 to 85 years on their diagnosis date (reference date) of stage IIB or higher (late-stage) CRC during 2006 to 2008. One or 2 control patients were selected for each case patient, matched on birth year, sex, health plan, and prior enrollment duration. Receipt of CRC screening 3 months to 10 years before the reference date, ascertained through medical record audits. Case patients and control patients were compared on receipt of screening colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy by using conditional logistic regression that accounted for health history, socioeconomic status, and other screening exposures. In analyses restricted to 471 eligible case patients and their 509 matched control patients, 13 case patients (2.8%) and 46 control patients (9.0%) had undergone screening colonoscopy, which corresponded to an adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of 0.29 (95% CI, 0.15 to 0.58) for any late-stage CRC, 0.36 (CI, 0.16 to 0.80) for right colon cancer, and 0.26 (CI, 0.06 to 1.11; P = 0.069) for left colon/rectum cancer. Ninety-two case patients (19.5%) and 173 control patients (34.0%) had screening sigmoidoscopy, corresponding to an AOR of 0.50 (CI, 0.36 to 0.70) overall, 0.79 (CI, 0.51 to 1.23) for right colon late-stage cancer, and 0.26 (CI, 0.14 to 0.48) for left colon cancer. The small number of screening colonoscopies affected the precision of the estimates. Screening with colonoscopy in average-risk persons was associated with reduced risk for diagnosis of incident late-stage CRC, including right-sided colon cancer. For sigmoidoscopy, this association was seen for left CRC, but the association for right colon late-stage cancer was not statistically significant. National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.
    Annals of internal medicine 03/2013; 158(5 Pt 1):312-20. DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303050-00003 · 16.10 Impact Factor
Show more