Society of Gynecologic Oncology Future of Physician Payment Reform Task Force report: The Endometrial Cancer Alternative Payment Model (ECAP).

Health care in the United States is in the midst of a significant transformation from a "fee for service" to a "fee for value" based model. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 has only accelerated this transition. Anticipating these reforms, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology developed the Future of Physician Payment Reform Task Force (PPRTF) in 2015 to develop strategies to ensure fair value based reimbursement policies for gynecologic cancer care. The PPRTF elected as a first task to develop an Alternative Payment Model for thesurgical management of low risk endometrial cancer. The history, rationale, and conceptual framework for the development of an Endometrial Cancer Alternative Payment Model are described in this white paper, as well as directions forfuture efforts.

Preoperative experience for public hospital patients with gynecologic cancer: Do structural barriers widen the gap?

BACKGROUND: Widespread disparities in care have been documented in women with gynecologic cancer in the United States. This study was designed to determine whether structural barriers to optimal care were present during the preoperative period for patients with gynecologic cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted for patients undergoing surgery for a gynecologic malignancy at a public hospital or a private hospital staffed by the same team of gynecologic oncologists between July 1, 2013 and July 1, 2014. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-seven cases were included for analysis (public hospital, 69; private hospital, 188). Patients treated at the private hospital were older (58 vs 52 years; P = .004) and had similar medical comorbidities (median Charlson comorbidity index at both hospitals, 6) but required fewer hospital visits in preparation for surgery (2 vs 4; P < .001). Public hospital patients had a longer wait time from the diagnosis of disease to surgery (63 vs 34 days; P < .001). According to a multiple linear regression model, the public hospital setting was associated with a longer interval from diagnosis to surgery with adjustments for the insurance status, age at diagnosis, cancer stage, and number of preoperative hospital visits (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients at the public hospital were subject to a greater number of preoperative visits and had to wait longer for surgery than patients at the private hospital. Attempts to reduce health care disparities should focus on improving efficiency in health care delivery systems once contact has been established.

Ovarian cancer care for the underserved: are surgical patterns of care different in a public hospital setting?

BACKGROUND: The New York City (NYC) public hospital system includes subspecialty care for gynecologic cancers, providing care to patients regardless of insurance status. The authors sought to determine the surgical patterns of care for ovarian cancer patients in the NYC public hospital system. METHODS: Ovarian cancer cases were identified in the New York State Department of Health Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database for years 2001 to 2006. Cases from NYC hospitals were separated into 2 cohorts: public and other NYC hospitals. Surgeons associated with each case were identified using the database and were stratified by volume of cases and presence of subspecialty training. RESULTS: A total of 12,202 admissions for ovarian cancer were identified. Of these, 3639 involved major surgery, and 187 were performed at public hospitals. There were more African American and Asian patients in the public cohort (P < .001). The primary insurer was more likely to be Medicaid or a self-payer in the public cohort (P < 0.001). Urgent or emergent admissions comprised 55% of all admissions in public hospitals, compared with 29% of admissions in other NYC hospitals (P < .001). Patients in public hospitals were less likely to have their surgery performed by a gynecologic oncologist (57% vs 74%, P < .001) and less likely to have their surgery performed by a high-volume surgeon (21% vs 47%; P < .001) compared with patients in other NYC hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian cancer patients treated in public hospitals are less likely to have gynecologic oncologists and high-volume surgeons involved in their care. This is a preliminary finding that warrants further investigation.