Variation in geographic access to chemotherapy by definitions of providers and service locations: A population-based observational study

Mary C. Schroeder, Cole G. Chapman, Matthew C. Nattinger, Thorvardur R. Halfdanarson, Taher Abu-Hejleh, Yu Yu Tien, John M. Brooks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: An aging population, with its associated rise in cancer incidence and strain on the oncology workforce, will continue to motivate patients, healthcare providers and policy makers to better understand the existing and growing challenges of access to chemotherapy. Administrative data, and SEER-Medicare data in particular, have been used to assess patterns of healthcare utilization because of its rich information regarding patients, their treatments, and their providers. To create measures of geographic access to chemotherapy, patients and oncologists must first be identified. Others have noted that identifying chemotherapy providers from Medicare claims is not always straightforward, as providers may report multiple or incorrect specialties and/or practice in multiple locations. Although previous studies have found that specialty codes alone fail to identify all oncologists, none have assessed whether various methods of identifying chemotherapy providers and their locations affect estimates of geographic access to care. Methods: SEER-Medicare data was used to identify patients, physicians, and chemotherapy use in this population-based observational study. We compared two measures of geographic access to chemotherapy, local area density and distance to nearest provider, across two definitions of chemotherapy provider (identified by specialty codes or billing codes) and two definitions of chemotherapy service location (where chemotherapy services were proven to be or possibly available) using descriptive statistics. Access measures were mapped for three representative registries. Results: In our sample, 57.2 % of physicians who submitted chemotherapy claims reported a specialty of hematology/oncology or medical oncology. These physicians were associated with 91.0 % of the chemotherapy claims. When providers were identified through billing codes instead of specialty codes, an additional 50.0 % of beneficiaries (from 23.8 % to 35.7 %) resided in the same ZIP code as a chemotherapy provider. Beneficiaries were also 1.3 times closer to a provider, in terms of driving time. Our access measures did not differ significantly across definitions of service location. Conclusions: Measures of geographic access to care were sensitive to definitions of chemotherapy providers; far more providers were identified through billing codes than specialty codes. They were not sensitive to definitions of service locations, as providers, regardless of how they are identified, generally provided chemotherapy at each of their practice locations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number274
JournalBMC Health Services Research
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 18 2016

Fingerprint

Observational Studies
Drug Therapy
Population
Medicare
Physicians
Medical Oncology
Hematology
Administrative Personnel
Health Personnel
Registries
Delivery of Health Care

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Chemotherapy
  • Geographic access to care
  • Oncologists

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

Schroeder, M. C., Chapman, C. G., Nattinger, M. C., Halfdanarson, T. R., Abu-Hejleh, T., Tien, Y. Y., & Brooks, J. M. (2016). Variation in geographic access to chemotherapy by definitions of providers and service locations: A population-based observational study. BMC Health Services Research, 16(1), [274]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1549-5

Variation in geographic access to chemotherapy by definitions of providers and service locations : A population-based observational study. / Schroeder, Mary C.; Chapman, Cole G.; Nattinger, Matthew C.; Halfdanarson, Thorvardur R.; Abu-Hejleh, Taher; Tien, Yu Yu; Brooks, John M.

In: BMC Health Services Research, Vol. 16, No. 1, 274, 18.07.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Schroeder, Mary C. ; Chapman, Cole G. ; Nattinger, Matthew C. ; Halfdanarson, Thorvardur R. ; Abu-Hejleh, Taher ; Tien, Yu Yu ; Brooks, John M. / Variation in geographic access to chemotherapy by definitions of providers and service locations : A population-based observational study. In: BMC Health Services Research. 2016 ; Vol. 16, No. 1.
@article{46db0701a3464a668a7f80f12900e1e2,
title = "Variation in geographic access to chemotherapy by definitions of providers and service locations: A population-based observational study",
abstract = "Background: An aging population, with its associated rise in cancer incidence and strain on the oncology workforce, will continue to motivate patients, healthcare providers and policy makers to better understand the existing and growing challenges of access to chemotherapy. Administrative data, and SEER-Medicare data in particular, have been used to assess patterns of healthcare utilization because of its rich information regarding patients, their treatments, and their providers. To create measures of geographic access to chemotherapy, patients and oncologists must first be identified. Others have noted that identifying chemotherapy providers from Medicare claims is not always straightforward, as providers may report multiple or incorrect specialties and/or practice in multiple locations. Although previous studies have found that specialty codes alone fail to identify all oncologists, none have assessed whether various methods of identifying chemotherapy providers and their locations affect estimates of geographic access to care. Methods: SEER-Medicare data was used to identify patients, physicians, and chemotherapy use in this population-based observational study. We compared two measures of geographic access to chemotherapy, local area density and distance to nearest provider, across two definitions of chemotherapy provider (identified by specialty codes or billing codes) and two definitions of chemotherapy service location (where chemotherapy services were proven to be or possibly available) using descriptive statistics. Access measures were mapped for three representative registries. Results: In our sample, 57.2 {\%} of physicians who submitted chemotherapy claims reported a specialty of hematology/oncology or medical oncology. These physicians were associated with 91.0 {\%} of the chemotherapy claims. When providers were identified through billing codes instead of specialty codes, an additional 50.0 {\%} of beneficiaries (from 23.8 {\%} to 35.7 {\%}) resided in the same ZIP code as a chemotherapy provider. Beneficiaries were also 1.3 times closer to a provider, in terms of driving time. Our access measures did not differ significantly across definitions of service location. Conclusions: Measures of geographic access to care were sensitive to definitions of chemotherapy providers; far more providers were identified through billing codes than specialty codes. They were not sensitive to definitions of service locations, as providers, regardless of how they are identified, generally provided chemotherapy at each of their practice locations.",
keywords = "Cancer, Chemotherapy, Geographic access to care, Oncologists",
author = "Schroeder, {Mary C.} and Chapman, {Cole G.} and Nattinger, {Matthew C.} and Halfdanarson, {Thorvardur R.} and Taher Abu-Hejleh and Tien, {Yu Yu} and Brooks, {John M.}",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1186/s12913-016-1549-5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
journal = "BMC Health Services Research",
issn = "1472-6963",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Variation in geographic access to chemotherapy by definitions of providers and service locations

T2 - A population-based observational study

AU - Schroeder, Mary C.

AU - Chapman, Cole G.

AU - Nattinger, Matthew C.

AU - Halfdanarson, Thorvardur R.

AU - Abu-Hejleh, Taher

AU - Tien, Yu Yu

AU - Brooks, John M.

PY - 2016/7/18

Y1 - 2016/7/18

N2 - Background: An aging population, with its associated rise in cancer incidence and strain on the oncology workforce, will continue to motivate patients, healthcare providers and policy makers to better understand the existing and growing challenges of access to chemotherapy. Administrative data, and SEER-Medicare data in particular, have been used to assess patterns of healthcare utilization because of its rich information regarding patients, their treatments, and their providers. To create measures of geographic access to chemotherapy, patients and oncologists must first be identified. Others have noted that identifying chemotherapy providers from Medicare claims is not always straightforward, as providers may report multiple or incorrect specialties and/or practice in multiple locations. Although previous studies have found that specialty codes alone fail to identify all oncologists, none have assessed whether various methods of identifying chemotherapy providers and their locations affect estimates of geographic access to care. Methods: SEER-Medicare data was used to identify patients, physicians, and chemotherapy use in this population-based observational study. We compared two measures of geographic access to chemotherapy, local area density and distance to nearest provider, across two definitions of chemotherapy provider (identified by specialty codes or billing codes) and two definitions of chemotherapy service location (where chemotherapy services were proven to be or possibly available) using descriptive statistics. Access measures were mapped for three representative registries. Results: In our sample, 57.2 % of physicians who submitted chemotherapy claims reported a specialty of hematology/oncology or medical oncology. These physicians were associated with 91.0 % of the chemotherapy claims. When providers were identified through billing codes instead of specialty codes, an additional 50.0 % of beneficiaries (from 23.8 % to 35.7 %) resided in the same ZIP code as a chemotherapy provider. Beneficiaries were also 1.3 times closer to a provider, in terms of driving time. Our access measures did not differ significantly across definitions of service location. Conclusions: Measures of geographic access to care were sensitive to definitions of chemotherapy providers; far more providers were identified through billing codes than specialty codes. They were not sensitive to definitions of service locations, as providers, regardless of how they are identified, generally provided chemotherapy at each of their practice locations.

AB - Background: An aging population, with its associated rise in cancer incidence and strain on the oncology workforce, will continue to motivate patients, healthcare providers and policy makers to better understand the existing and growing challenges of access to chemotherapy. Administrative data, and SEER-Medicare data in particular, have been used to assess patterns of healthcare utilization because of its rich information regarding patients, their treatments, and their providers. To create measures of geographic access to chemotherapy, patients and oncologists must first be identified. Others have noted that identifying chemotherapy providers from Medicare claims is not always straightforward, as providers may report multiple or incorrect specialties and/or practice in multiple locations. Although previous studies have found that specialty codes alone fail to identify all oncologists, none have assessed whether various methods of identifying chemotherapy providers and their locations affect estimates of geographic access to care. Methods: SEER-Medicare data was used to identify patients, physicians, and chemotherapy use in this population-based observational study. We compared two measures of geographic access to chemotherapy, local area density and distance to nearest provider, across two definitions of chemotherapy provider (identified by specialty codes or billing codes) and two definitions of chemotherapy service location (where chemotherapy services were proven to be or possibly available) using descriptive statistics. Access measures were mapped for three representative registries. Results: In our sample, 57.2 % of physicians who submitted chemotherapy claims reported a specialty of hematology/oncology or medical oncology. These physicians were associated with 91.0 % of the chemotherapy claims. When providers were identified through billing codes instead of specialty codes, an additional 50.0 % of beneficiaries (from 23.8 % to 35.7 %) resided in the same ZIP code as a chemotherapy provider. Beneficiaries were also 1.3 times closer to a provider, in terms of driving time. Our access measures did not differ significantly across definitions of service location. Conclusions: Measures of geographic access to care were sensitive to definitions of chemotherapy providers; far more providers were identified through billing codes than specialty codes. They were not sensitive to definitions of service locations, as providers, regardless of how they are identified, generally provided chemotherapy at each of their practice locations.

KW - Cancer

KW - Chemotherapy

KW - Geographic access to care

KW - Oncologists

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978743343&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84978743343&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12913-016-1549-5

DO - 10.1186/s12913-016-1549-5

M3 - Article

C2 - 27430623

AN - SCOPUS:84978743343

VL - 16

JO - BMC Health Services Research

JF - BMC Health Services Research

SN - 1472-6963

IS - 1

M1 - 274

ER -