RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The association between surgical volume and patient outcome is well established, with higher case volume associated with a lower risk of complications. We hypothesized that the geographic distribution of endocrine/head and neck surgeons with an endocrine focus in the United States and Puerto Rico may limit access to many potential patients, particularly in rural areas. METHODS: We used web-based directories from the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons, American Head and Neck Society, and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery to identify endocrine surgery specialists in the United States and Puerto Rico. Using geographic coordinates and OpenStreetMap and Valhalla software, we calculated the areas within a 60-, 90-, or 120-minute driving distance from specialist offices. We used 2020 U.S. Census Data to calculate census tract populations inside or outside the accessible areas. RESULTS: Excluding duplicate providers across organizations, we geocoded 603 specialist addresses in the United States and Puerto. We found that 23.76% (78.3 million) of Americans do not have access to a society-affiliated endocrine/head and neck surgeon with an endocrine focus within a 60-minute drive, 14.37% (47.4 million) within a 90-minute drive, and 8.38% (27.6 million) within a 120-minute drive. We observed that the areas of coverage are primarily focused on metropolitan areas. CONCLUSION: Nearly one-third of Americans do not have access to a society-affiliated endocrine/head and neck surgeon with an endocrine focus within a 1-hour drive, highlighting a concerning geographic barrier to care. Further work is needed to facilitate patient access and mitigate disparities in quality care.
Assuntos
Cirurgiões , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Porto Rico , Qualidade da Assistência à SaúdeRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Early-life socioeconomic status (SES) and adversity are associated with late-life cognition and risk of dementia. We examined the association between early-life SES and adversity and late-life cross-sectional cognitive outcomes as well as global cognitive decline, hypothesizing that adulthood SES would mediate these associations. METHODS: Our sample (N = 837) was a racially and ethnically diverse cohort of non-Hispanic/Latino White (48%), Black (27%), and Hispanic/Latino (19%) participants from Northern California. Participant addresses were geocoded to the level of the census tract, and US Census Tract 2010 variables (e.g., percent with high school diploma) were extracted and combined to create a neighborhood SES composite. We used multilevel latent variable models to estimate early-life (e.g., parental education, whether participant ever went hungry) and adult (participant's education, main occupation) SES factors and their associations with cross-sectional and longitudinal cognitive outcomes of episodic memory, semantic memory, executive function, and spatial ability. RESULTS: Child and adult factors were strongly related to domain-specific cognitive intercepts (0.20-0.48 SD per SD of SES factor); in contrast, SES factors were not related to global cognitive change (0.001-0.01 SD per year per SD of SES factor). Adulthood SES mediated a large percentage (68-75%) of the total early-life effect on cognition. CONCLUSIONS: Early-life sociocontextual factors are more strongly associated with cross-sectional late-life cognitive performance compared to cognitive change; this effect is largely mediated through associations with adulthood SES.