RESUMEN
Although socioeconomic status (SES) is fundamentally related to underutilization of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, the role of perceived economic strain and subjective social status with CRC screening is understudied. The aim of this study was to investigate whether greater perceived economic strain or lower subjective social status would decrease the odds of CRC screening uptake and being up-to-date with guideline-recommended CRC screening. We also explored interactions with household income and educational attainment. Cross-sectional survey-based data from men aged 45-75 years living in the United States (N = 499) were collected in February 2022. Study outcomes were ever completing a stool- or exam-based CRC screening test and being up-to-date with CRC screening. Perceived economic strain and subjective social status were the predictors. We conducted logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Greater perceptions of economic strain decreased odds of being up-to-date with CRC screening. Household income modified the association between perceived economic strain and completing a stool-based test; the association was stronger for men from lower-income households. In unadjusted models, higher subjective social status increased odds of completing an exam-based test and being up-to-date with CRC screening. Our findings suggest that experiencing economic strain may interfere with men's CRC screening decisions and may capture additional information about barriers to CRC screening utilization beyond those captured by income or education.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Some studies have suggested disparities in access to robotic colorectal surgery, however, it is unclear which factors are most meaningful in the determination of approach relative to laparoscopic or open surgery. This study aimed to identify the most influential factors contributing to robotic colorectal surgery utilization. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of published studies that compared the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery versus laparoscopic or open surgery. Eligible studies were identified through PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertations in September 2021. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included in the analysis. Patients were less likely to undergo robotic versus laparoscopic surgery if they were female (OR = 0.91, 0.84-0.98), older (OR = 1.61, 1.38-1.88), had Medicare (OR = 0.84, 0.71-0.99), or had comorbidities (OR = 0.83, 0.77-0.91). Non-academic hospitals had lower odds of conducting robotic versus laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.73, 0.62-0.86). Additional disparities were observed when comparing robotic with open surgery for patients who were Black (OR = 0.78, 0.71-0.86), had lower income (OR = 0.67, 0.62-0.74), had Medicaid (OR = 0.58, 0.43-0.80), or were uninsured (OR = 0.29, 0.21-0.39). CONCLUSION: When determining who undergoes robotic surgery, consideration of factors such as age and comorbid conditions may be clinically justified, while other factors seem less justifiable. Black patients and the underinsured were less likely to undergo robotic surgery. This study identifies nonclinical disparities in access to robotics that should be addressed to provide more equitable access to innovations in colorectal surgery.