The policies that benefit high-volume hospitals hurt rural cancer patients

Rural areas of the U.S. are severely lacking surgeons, but referring cancer patients to hospitals that perform a high volume of surgeries and have more centralized care may actually be worse for patient outcomes, according to a study led by researchers at the University of Pittsburgh.

"Not only are there cost and time burdens for rural patients who have to travel for care, but they are away from their local support networks, which can impact their quality of life," Lindsay Sabik, PhD, an associate professor and lead author of the study, said in an Aug. 17 news release.

The study, published Aug. 17 in JCO Oncology Practice, looked at data from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council of adult patients who received a diagnosis of either lung, pancreas, breast, brain, rectum, bladder, colon, esophagus, prostate or stomach cancer and also had a related surgery between 2017 and 2020. Then, researchers analyzed related data to determine if each patient lived in an urban or rural county and whether the hospitals across the state could be classified as "high-volume" or not. 

Hospitals that perform a high volume of surgeries tend to be located in more urban areas, but experts noted that "rural patients were traveling to high-volume hospitals for more complex cancer surgeries," which they say, is something to pay attention to.

"Our study suggests that narrowly focusing on hospital volumes and tying that to insurance reimbursement might mask complexities and trade-offs in achieving the goal of optimizing patient outcomes and experiences," Dr. Sabik said in the release.

Copyright © 2024 Becker's Healthcare. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Cookie Policy. Linking and Reprinting Policy.

 

Featured Whitepapers

Featured Webinars

>