Skin cancer screening and primary prevention: facts and controversies.

Skin cancer is both common and responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. Opportunities for both primary and secondary prevention are available to both dermatologists and non-dermatologists. Counseling selected patients about ultraviolet avoidance and proper use of sunscreens is recommended. Due to technical and financial barriers, no study has conclusively confirmed the benefits of skin cancer screening. Both dermatologists and non-dermatologists often do not perform total body skin examinations during clinical encounters, despite high acceptance rates by patients. Many non-dermatologists would benefit from additional education pertaining to the diagnosis of cutaneous malignancy. Teledermatology may have a role in areas with poor access to dermatologists. There are ample opportunities for more to be learned in the future.

An economic analysis of robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stroke is a leading cause of disability. Rehabilitation robotics have been developed to aid in recovery after a stroke. This study determined the additional cost of robot-assisted therapy and tested its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We estimated the intervention costs and tracked participants' healthcare costs. We collected quality of life using the Stroke Impact Scale and the Health Utilities Index. We analyzed the cost data at 36 weeks postrandomization using multivariate regression models controlling for site, presence of a prior stroke, and Veterans Affairs costs in the year before randomization. RESULTS: A total of 127 participants were randomized to usual care plus robot therapy (n=49), usual care plus intensive comparison therapy (n=50), or usual care alone (n=28). The average cost of delivering robot therapy and intensive comparison therapy was $5152 and $7382, respectively (P<0.001), and both were significantly more expensive than usual care alone (no additional intervention costs). At 36 weeks postrandomization, the total costs were comparable for the 3 groups ($17 831 for robot therapy, $19 746 for intensive comparison therapy, and $19 098 for usual care). Changes in quality of life were modest and not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: The added cost of delivering robot or intensive comparison therapy was recuperated by lower healthcare use costs compared with those in the usual care group. However, uncertainty remains about the cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted rehabilitation compared with traditional rehabilitation. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00372411.

Earlier stage at diagnosis and improved survival among Medicare HMO patients with breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate differences in the stage at diagnosis and the survival of breast cancer patients enrolled in two different Medicare healthcare delivery systems: fee for service (FFS) and health maintenance organizations (HMO). METHODS: We used a linkage of two national databases, the Medicare database from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program database, to evaluate differences in demographic data, stage at diagnosis, and survival in patients with breast cancers over the period 1985-2001. RESULTS: Medicare patients enrolled in HMOs were diagnosed at an earlier stage of diagnosis than FFS patients. HMO patients diagnosed with breast cancer had improved survival, and these differences remained even after controlling for potential confounders. Specifically, breast cancer patients enrolled in HMOs had 9% increased probability of survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.93) than their counterparts enrolled in FFS. These findings persisted even when patients had a cancer diagnosis before their breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Improved survival among breast cancer patients in HMOs compared with FFS is likely due to a combination of factors, including but not limited to earlier stage at the time of diagnosis.

Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Effective rehabilitative therapies are needed for patients with long-term deficits after stroke. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving 127 patients with moderate-to-severe upper-limb impairment 6 months or more after a stroke, we randomly assigned 49 patients to receive intensive robot-assisted therapy, 50 to receive intensive comparison therapy, and 28 to receive usual care. Therapy consisted of 36 1-hour sessions over a period of 12 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in motor function, as measured on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Sensorimotor Recovery after Stroke, at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were scores on the Wolf Motor Function Test and the Stroke Impact Scale. Secondary analyses assessed the treatment effect at 36 weeks. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, the mean Fugl-Meyer score for patients receiving robot-assisted therapy was better than that for patients receiving usual care (difference, 2.17 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.23 to 4.58) and worse than that for patients receiving intensive comparison therapy (difference, -0.14 points; 95% CI, -2.94 to 2.65), but the differences were not significant. The results on the Stroke Impact Scale were significantly better for patients receiving robot-assisted therapy than for those receiving usual care (difference, 7.64 points; 95% CI, 2.03 to 13.24). No other treatment comparisons were significant at 12 weeks. Secondary analyses showed that at 36 weeks, robot-assisted therapy significantly improved the Fugl-Meyer score (difference, 2.88 points; 95% CI, 0.57 to 5.18) and the time on the Wolf Motor Function Test (difference, -8.10 seconds; 95% CI, -13.61 to -2.60) as compared with usual care but not with intensive therapy. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with long-term upper-limb deficits after stroke, robot-assisted therapy did not significantly improve motor function at 12 weeks, as compared with usual care or intensive therapy. In secondary analyses, robot-assisted therapy improved outcomes over 36 weeks as compared with usual care but not with intensive therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00372411.)

Utilizing VA information technology to develop psychiatric resident prescription profiles.

OBJECTIVES: Feedback about resident prescription practices allows psychiatry educators to ensure that residents have broad prescribing experience and can facilitate practice-based learning initiatives. The authors report on a procedure utilizing U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs' computerized pharmacy records to efficiently construct comprehensive individual psychiatric resident prescription practice profiles. METHODS: Veterans Affairs information technology provided a methodology to efficiently construct individual and aggregate resident prescription profiles, including cost data. To demonstrate the utility of prescription profiles, individual and aggregate antipsychotic medication prescription profiles were constructed of nine residents working in a Veterans Affairs psychotic disorders clinic. RESULTS: Developing the individual and aggregate prescription profiles required only 5 hours. The profiles revealed that residents had a restricted range of experience prescribing antipsychotic medications, with some residents not having prescribed all five major atypical agents and the majority having prescribed a limited number of typical agents. The profiles highlighted cost differences among the atypical antipsychotic medications and between the typical and atypical antipsychotic medications. CONCLUSION: Prescription profiles facilitate resident education by enabling educators to determine the range of antipsychotic medications residents prescribe. A psychiatric residency program could utilize these prescription profiles to improve resident competency in practice based learning.

Success of carotid endarterectomy in veterans: high medical risk does not equate with high surgical risk.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in stroke prevention has been well documented. But "high-risk" patients have traditionally been excluded from these studies and may be offered alternate therapies. We examined the safety of CEA in veterans, a medically high-risk group with multiple comorbidities. STUDY DESIGN: The records of all patients having CEAs performed between 1995 and 1999 in the Connecticut Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital were reviewed. Survival and freedom from stroke were determined using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. The effects of risk factors on outcomes were analyzed with Cox regression. RESULTS: There were 128 CEAs performed in 120 patients, with a mean followup of 8.5 years. Most patients were symptomatic preoperatively and had a high incidence of hypertension (83%), coronary artery disease (64%), diabetes (37%), and pulmonary disease (22%). Incidences of perioperative (30-day) mortality (0.8%), stroke (1.6%), and myocardial infarction (0.8%) were low. Survival rates at 8.9 and 12 years were 50% and 13%, respectively, with 90% patient followup. Freedom from ipsilateral stroke was 90% at 12 years. Age (hazards ratio [HR] 1.1, p=0.004), hypertension (HR 2.6, p=0.04), and elevated creatinine (HR 3.7, p=0.001) were significant risk factors for mortality. Age (HR 0.8, p=0.07) and diastolic blood pressure (HR 1.2, p=0.06) were predictive of ipsilateral stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Despite poor health and symptomatic presentation, patients treated with CEA achieved excellent perioperative outcomes and were protected from stroke for the remainder of their lives. Multiple medical comorbidities should not be used as exclusion criteria for CEA.

The effect of medicare health care delivery systems on survival for patients with breast and colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Two of the most common types of health care delivery systems in the U.S. are fee-for-service (FFS) and managed care systems such as health maintenance organizations (HMO). Differences may exist in patient outcomes depending on the health care delivery system in which they are enrolled. We evaluated differences in the survival of patients with breast and colorectal cancer at diagnosis between the two Medicare health care delivery systems (FFS and HMO). METHODS: We used a linkage of two national databases, the Medicare database from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database, to evaluate differences in demographic data, stage at diagnosis, and survival between breast and colorectal cancer over the period 1985 to 2001. RESULTS: Medicare patients enrolled in HMOs were diagnosed at an earlier stage of diagnosis than FFS patients. HMO patients diagnosed with breast and colorectal cancer had improved survival, and these differences remained even after controlling for potential confounders (such as stage at diagnosis, age, race, socioeconomic status, and marital status). Specifically, patients enrolled in HMOs had 9% greater survival in hazards ratio if they had breast cancer, and 6% if they had colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Differences exist in survival among patients in HMOs compared with FFS. This is likely due to a combination of factors, including but not limited to, earlier stage at the time of diagnoses.

The association of Medicare health care delivery systems with stage at diagnosis and survival for patients with melanoma.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in the stage at diagnosis and survival for melanoma between the 2 most common types of Medicare health care delivery systems, fee-for-service (FFS) and managed care (health maintenance organizations [HMOs]), in the United States during the period from January 1, 1985, through December 31, 1994. DESIGN: We used a linkage of 2 national databases, ie, the Medicare database from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (formerly the Health Care Financing Administration) and the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database, to evaluate differences in demographic data, stage at diagnosis, and survival for melanoma between the HMO and FFS groups. Patients A population of 4608 patients (62% men; 92% white). RESULTS: We found an earlier stage of diagnosis for the HMO group compared with the FFS group for melanoma as the first cancer diagnosis, but this did not persist when melanoma was the second or a later cancer diagnosis. For patients with melanoma as the first cancer diagnosis, improved survival was related to earlier stage at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Differences exist in stage at diagnosis between patients in HMOs compared with those in FFS health care plans. This is likely due in part to utilization of services or access to care for patients in HMOs, and may be similar to that of patients in FFS plans with a previous cancer diagnosis before their diagnosis of melanoma. We did not find an increased risk of diagnosis with a late-stage cancer among patients with vs those without a previous cancer diagnosis. Improved survival appears to be related to earlier stage at diagnosis.

The effect of Medicare health care systems on women with breast and cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Two common health care delivery systems in the United States are fee-for-service and managed care systems, including health maintenance organizations (HMOs). Differences may exist in patient outcomes depending upon the health care delivery system in which they are enrolled. We evaluated possible differences in the stage at diagnosis for breast and cervical cancer between 2 Medicare health care delivery systems (ie, fee for service and HMO) over the period 1985-2001. METHODS: We used a linkage of 2 national databases: the Medicare database from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database to evaluate differences in stage at diagnosis between HMO and fee for service for breast and cervical cancer. RESULTS: We studied 130,336 Medicare-aged women with breast cancer (83% Medicare fee for service) and 6,758 women with cervical cancer (87% Medicare fee for service). We found an earlier stage of diagnosis for HMO patients, which remained significant after adjusting for potential confounding variables. Women enrolled in HMOs with breast cancer were 17% more likely and those with cervical cancer 35% more likely to be diagnosed at an in situ stage of diagnosis than fee-for-service patients. It is of note that when women had other cancer diagnoses, no statistically significant differences were seen in stage at diagnosis for either cancer between fee-for-service and HMO patients. CONCLUSION: Differences exist in stage at diagnosis between Medicare patients enrolled in HMOs compared with fee for service. This is likely due in part to use of or access to care.