Cargando…

Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer

INTRODUCTION: Patients who are disadvantaged socioeconomically or live in rural areas may not pursue surgery at high-volume centers where outcomes are better for some complex procedures. The objective of this study was to compare rural and urban patient differences directly by location of residence...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brungardt, Joseph G., Almoghrabi, Omar A., Moore, Carolyn B., Chen, G. John, Nagji, Alykhan S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: University of Kansas Medical Center 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647987/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34888000
http://dx.doi.org/10.17161/kjm.vol14.15597
_version_ 1784610707754450944
author Brungardt, Joseph G.
Almoghrabi, Omar A.
Moore, Carolyn B.
Chen, G. John
Nagji, Alykhan S.
author_facet Brungardt, Joseph G.
Almoghrabi, Omar A.
Moore, Carolyn B.
Chen, G. John
Nagji, Alykhan S.
author_sort Brungardt, Joseph G.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Patients who are disadvantaged socioeconomically or live in rural areas may not pursue surgery at high-volume centers where outcomes are better for some complex procedures. The objective of this study was to compare rural and urban patient differences directly by location of residence and outcomes after undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. METHODS: An analysis of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) database was performed, capturing adult patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy. Patients were stratified into rural or urban groups by the National Center for Health Statistics Urban-Rural Classification Scheme. Demographics, hospital variables, and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2,877 patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were captured by the database, with 228 (7.92%) rural and 2,575 (89.50%) urban patients. The rural and urban groups had no differences in age, race, and insurance status, and shared many common comorbidities. Major outcomes of mortality (3.95% versus 4.27%, p = 0.815) and length of stay (15.75 ± 13.22 vs. 15.55 ± 14.91 days, p = 0.828) were similar for both rural and urban patients. There was a trend for rural patients to more likely be discharged home (35.96% vs. 29.79%, OR 0.667 [95% CI 0.479 – 0.929]; p = 0.0167). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective administrative database study indicated that rural and urban patients received equivalent postoperative care after undergoing esophagectomy. The findings were reassuring as there did not appear to be a disparity in major outcomes depending on the location of residence, but further studies are necessary to assure equitable treatment for rural patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8647987
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher University of Kansas Medical Center
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86479872021-12-08 Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer Brungardt, Joseph G. Almoghrabi, Omar A. Moore, Carolyn B. Chen, G. John Nagji, Alykhan S. Kans J Med Original Research INTRODUCTION: Patients who are disadvantaged socioeconomically or live in rural areas may not pursue surgery at high-volume centers where outcomes are better for some complex procedures. The objective of this study was to compare rural and urban patient differences directly by location of residence and outcomes after undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. METHODS: An analysis of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) database was performed, capturing adult patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy. Patients were stratified into rural or urban groups by the National Center for Health Statistics Urban-Rural Classification Scheme. Demographics, hospital variables, and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2,877 patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were captured by the database, with 228 (7.92%) rural and 2,575 (89.50%) urban patients. The rural and urban groups had no differences in age, race, and insurance status, and shared many common comorbidities. Major outcomes of mortality (3.95% versus 4.27%, p = 0.815) and length of stay (15.75 ± 13.22 vs. 15.55 ± 14.91 days, p = 0.828) were similar for both rural and urban patients. There was a trend for rural patients to more likely be discharged home (35.96% vs. 29.79%, OR 0.667 [95% CI 0.479 – 0.929]; p = 0.0167). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective administrative database study indicated that rural and urban patients received equivalent postoperative care after undergoing esophagectomy. The findings were reassuring as there did not appear to be a disparity in major outcomes depending on the location of residence, but further studies are necessary to assure equitable treatment for rural patients. University of Kansas Medical Center 2021-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8647987/ /pubmed/34888000 http://dx.doi.org/10.17161/kjm.vol14.15597 Text en © 2021 The University of Kansas Medical Center https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd) License. (CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Research
Brungardt, Joseph G.
Almoghrabi, Omar A.
Moore, Carolyn B.
Chen, G. John
Nagji, Alykhan S.
Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer
title Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer
title_full Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer
title_fullStr Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer
title_short Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer
title_sort rural-urban differences in esophagectomy for cancer
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647987/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34888000
http://dx.doi.org/10.17161/kjm.vol14.15597
work_keys_str_mv AT brungardtjosephg ruralurbandifferencesinesophagectomyforcancer
AT almoghrabiomara ruralurbandifferencesinesophagectomyforcancer
AT moorecarolynb ruralurbandifferencesinesophagectomyforcancer
AT chengjohn ruralurbandifferencesinesophagectomyforcancer
AT nagjialykhans ruralurbandifferencesinesophagectomyforcancer