Schroeck Florian R, Kaufman Samuel R, Jacobs Bruce L, Skolarus Ted A, Zhang Yun, Hollenbeck Brent K
Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Division of Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Urology. 2014 Nov;84(5):1066-72. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.06.067. Epub 2014 Oct 24.
To evaluate the association of technological capacity with prostate cancer quality of care. Technological capacity was conceptualized as a market's ability to provide prostate cancer treatment with new technology, including robotic prostatectomy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).
In this retrospective cohort study, we used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database from 2004 to 2009 to identify men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer (n = 46,274). We measured technological capacity as the number of providers performing robotic prostatectomy or IMRT per population in a health care market. We used multilevel logistic regression analysis to assess the association of technological capacity with receiving quality care according to a set of nationally endorsed quality measures, while adjusting for patient and market characteristics.
Overall, our findings were mixed with only subtle differences in quality of care comparing high-tech with low-tech markets. High robotic prostatectomy capacity was associated with better adherence to some quality measures, such as avoiding unnecessary bone scans (79.8% vs 73.0%; P = .003) and having follow-up with urologists (67.7% vs 62.6%; P = .023). However, for most measures, neither high robotic prostatectomy nor high-IMRT capacity was associated with significant increases in adherence rates. In fact, for 1 measure (treatment by a high-volume provider), high-IMRT capacity was associated with lower performance (23.4% vs 28.5%; P <.001).
Our findings suggest that new technology is not clearly associated with higher quality of care. To improve quality, more specific efforts will be needed.
评估技术能力与前列腺癌医疗质量之间的关联。技术能力被定义为一个市场运用包括机器人前列腺切除术和调强放射治疗(IMRT)在内的新技术提供前列腺癌治疗的能力。
在这项回顾性队列研究中,我们使用了2004年至2009年监测、流行病学和最终结果-医疗保险链接数据库中的数据,以识别新诊断为前列腺癌的男性(n = 46,274)。我们将技术能力衡量为医疗保健市场中每单位人口进行机器人前列腺切除术或IMRT的医疗服务提供者数量。我们使用多水平逻辑回归分析,根据一套国家认可的质量指标评估技术能力与接受高质量医疗之间的关联,同时对患者和市场特征进行调整。
总体而言,我们的研究结果好坏参半,高科技市场与低科技市场在医疗质量上只有细微差异。高机器人前列腺切除术能力与更好地遵守某些质量指标相关,例如避免不必要的骨扫描(79.8%对73.0%;P = .003)以及接受泌尿科医生的随访(67.7%对62.6%;P = .023)。然而,对于大多数指标,高机器人前列腺切除术能力和高IMRT能力均与依从率的显著提高无关。事实上,对于一项指标(由高年手术量医疗服务提供者进行治疗),高IMRT能力与较低的表现相关(23.4%对28.5%;P <.001)。
我们的研究结果表明,新技术与更高的医疗质量没有明显关联。为了提高质量,需要做出更具体的努力。