Patient Perspectives of Head and Neck Survivorship Care

Rhode, Robert; Mckinstry, C.; Osazuwa‐Peters, Nosayaba; Ward, Greg; Walker, Rebecca

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.12.215

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For many patients with HNC, travel is a costly and time-consuming burden. 27 For others, it may represent an opportunity to be treated on a clinical trial or at a prestigious university. From the data in this study, patients who travel shorter distances are more often in low socioeconomic status groups and are more likely to be treated at lower-volume, nonacademic facilities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distance Traveled to Head and Neck Cancer Provider: A Measure of Socioeconomic Status and Access

Liebendorfer

Zevallos

Mazul

2019

Otolaryngol.--head neck surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Improved head and neck cancer survival has been associated with traveling farther distances for treatment, potentially due to patients seeking higher-quality facilities. This study investigates the role of both facility and confounding patient factors on this relationship. Study Design Review of national registry data. Setting National Cancer Database. Subjects and Methods Adults with head and neck cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2014 were identified. Overall survival was compared among distance-to-facility quartiles via univariate and multivariate survival models. Then, the analysis was stratified by facility and patient factors, and the association between distance and survival was compared among strata. Results Overall survival was worst in the shortest-distance quartile (<5 miles; median survival, 80.7 months; 95% CI, 79.2-82.3), while other distance groups showed similar survival (range, 96.4-104 months). This finding remained in the multivariate model (adjusted hazard ratio vs first distance quartile: 0.88; 95% CI, 0.87-0.89). The association between survival and distance persisted in all subgroups when stratified by facility volume and type (adjusted hazard ratio range, 0.82-0.91), suggesting that facility quality does not fully account for this association. When stratified by income, distance remained statistically associated with survival but with a smaller effect size than that of income. Conclusion The association between distance to treating facility and head and neck cancer survival is limited to patients with worse survival outcomes living within 5 miles of the facility and is not fully explained by measures of facility quality.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For many patients with HNC, travel is a costly and time‐consuming burden 27 . For others, it may represent an opportunity to be treated on a clinical trial or at a prestigious university.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%