Impact of the Affordable Care Act on access to accredited facilities for cancer treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To examine differential changes in receipt of surgery at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer centers (NCI-CCC) and Commission on Cancer (CoC) accredited hospitals for patients with cancer more likely to be newly eligible for coverage under Affordable Care Act (ACA) insurance expansions, relative to those less likely to have been impacted by the ACA. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: Pennsylvania Cancer Registry (PCR) for 2010-2019 linked with discharge records from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4). STUDY DESIGN: Outcomes include whether cancer surgery was performed at an NCI-CCC or a CoC-accredited hospital. We conducted a difference-in-differences analysis, estimating linear probability models for each outcome that control for residence in a county with above median county-level pre-ACA uninsurance and the interaction between county-level baseline uninsurance and cancer treatment post-ACA to capture differential changes in access between those more and less likely to become newly eligible for insurance coverage (based on area-level proxy). All models control for age, sex, race and ethnicity, cancer site and stage, census-tract level urban/rural residence, Area Deprivation Index, and year- and county-fixed effects. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We identified adults aged 26-64 in PCR with prostate, lung, or colorectal cancer who received cancer-directed surgery and had a corresponding surgery discharge record in PHC4. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We observe a differential increase in receiving care at an NCI-CCC of 6.2 percentage points (95% CI: 2.6-9.8; baseline mean = 9.8%) among patients in high baseline uninsurance areas (p = 0.001). Our estimate of the differential change in care at the larger set of CoC hospitals is positive (3.9 percentage points [95% CI: -0.5-8.2; baseline mean = 73.7%]) but not statistically significant (p = 0.079). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that insurance expansions under the ACA were associated with increased access to NCI-CCCs.

Association of Medicare eligibility with access to and affordability of care among older cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Older cancer survivors have substantial needs for ongoing care, but they may encounter difficulties accessing care due to cost concerns. We examined whether near-universal insurance coverage through Medicare-a key source of health insurance coverage in this population-is associated with improvements in care access and affordability among older cancer survivors around age 65. METHODS: In a nationally representative sample of cancer survivors (aged 50-80) from 2006-2018 National Health Interview Survey, we employed a quasi-experimental, regression discontinuity design to estimate changes in insurance coverage, delayed/skipped care due to cost, and worries about or problems paying medical bills at age 65. RESULTS: Medicare coverage sharply increased from 8.3% at age 64 to 98.2% at age 65, ensuring near-universal insurance coverage (99.5%). Medicare eligibility at age 65 was associated with reductions in delayed/skipped care due to cost (discontinuity, - 5.7 percentage points or pp; 95% CI, - 8.1, - 3.3; P < .001), worries about paying for medical bills (- 7.7 pp; 95% CI, - 12.0, - 3.2; P = .001), and problems paying medical bills (- 3.2 pp; 95% CI, - 6.1, - 0.2; P = .036). However, a sizable proportion reported any access or affordability problems (29.7%) between ages 66 and 80. CONCLUSIONS: Near-universal Medicare coverage at age 65 was associated with a reduction-but not elimination-of access and affordability problems among cancer survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These findings reaffirm the role of Medicare in improving access and affordability for older cancer survivor and highlight opportunities for reforms to further alleviate financial burden of care in this population.

Telemedicine in urologic oncology care: Will telemedicine exacerbate disparities?

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer outcomes are associated with access to care. Telemedicine can improve access but may be underutilized by certain patient populations. Our objective was to determine if the patient populations who suffer worse oncologic outcomes are the same as those who are less likely to use telemedicine. METHODS: Using an institutional database, we identified all prostate, bladder and kidney cancer encounters from March 14, 2020 to October 31, 2021 (n = 15,623; n = 4, 14; n = 3,830). Telemedicine was used in 13%, 8%, and 12% of these encounters, respectively. We performed random effects modeling analysis to examine patient and provider characteristics associated with telemedicine use. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported as measures of association. RESULTS: Among prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer patients, Black patients had lower odds of a telemedicine encounter (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37-0.69; OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.07-0.70; OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24-0.86), and patients residing in small and isolated small rural towns areas had higher odds of a telemedicine encounter (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.09-1.91; OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.14-3.94; OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.12-3.19). Compared to providers in practice ≤5 years, providers in practice for 6 to 15 years had significantly higher odds of a telemedicine encounter for prostate and bladder cancer patients (OR 4.10, 95% CI 1.4511.58; OR 3.42, 95% CI 1.09-10.77). CONCLUSION: The lower rates of telemedicine use among Black patients could exacerbate pre-existing disparities in prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer outcomes.

Using a Multi-pronged Behavioral Intervention to Standardize Antibiotic Prophylaxis at the Time of Foley Catheter Removal After Radical Prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To identify antibiotic prescribing patterns at the time of foley catheter removal after radical prostatectomy and implement a multi-pronged behavioral intervention to standardize antibiotic use. METHODS: This was a single-institution study examining the prescribing of antibiotics at the time of foley catheter removal after radical prostatectomy. Pre-intervention data were collected retrospectively to establish baselines for antibiotic prescribing, patient characteristics, and urinary tract infection rates. A single dose of an oral antibiotic taken at the time of foley catheter removal was recommended as the standard antibiotic protocol. A multi-pronged behavioral intervention was used to encourage compliance with our protocol. Adherence to the protocol, quantity of antibiotics prescribed, and rate of urinary tract infection were recorded prospectively. Durability of the intervention was evaluated during a post-intervention phase. RESULTS: A total of 416 patients and 6 surgeons were included in the study. Accordance with the standardized antibiotic protocol was 59% in the pre-intervention phase and 91% in the intervention phase (P = .03). No patients in the intervention or post-intervention phase were prescribed more than one dose of an antibiotic. The rate of urinary tract infection did not differ across the study phases. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a multi-pronged behavioral intervention resulted in a high rate of surgeon compliance with a standardized antibiotic protocol. This led to a significant reduction in antibiotic use with no change in the rate of urinary tract infection after foley catheter removal after radical prostatectomy.

Model risk scores may underestimate rate of biochemical recurrence in African American men with localized prostate cancer: a cohort analysis of over 3000 men.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to determine if there is a difference in prostate cancer nomogram-adjusted risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) and/or adverse pathology (AP) between African American (AAM) and Caucasian men (CM) undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of men undergoing RP in the Pennsylvania Urologic Regional Collaborative between 2015 and 2021. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to compare the rate of BCR after RP, and logistic regression models were used to compare rates of AP after RP between CM and AAM, adjusting for the CAPRA, CAPRA-S, and MSKCC pre- and post-operative nomogram scores. RESULTS: Rates of BCR and AP after RP were analyzed from 3190 and 5029 men meeting inclusion criteria, respectively. The 2-year BCR-free survival was lower in AAM (72.5%) compared to CM (79.0%), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.38 (95% CI 1.16-1.63, p < 0.001). The rate of BCR was significantly greater in AAM compared to CM after adjustment for MSKCC pre-op (HR 1.29; 95% CI 1.08-1.53; p = 0.004), and post-op nomograms (HR 1.26; 95% CI 1.05-1.49; p < 0.001). There was a trend toward higher BCR rates among AAM after adjustment for CAPRA (HR 1.13; 95% CI 0.95-1.35; p = 0.17) and CAPRA-S nomograms (HR 1.11; 95% 0.93-1.32; p = 0.25), which did not reach statistical significance. The rate of AP was significantly greater in AAM compared to CM after adjusting for CAPRA (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.10-1.50; p = 0.001) and MSKCC nomograms (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.06-1.43; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: This analysis of a large multicenter cohort provides further evidence that AAM may have higher rates of BCR and AP after RP than is predicted by CAPRA and MSKCC nomograms. Accordingly, AAM may benefit with closer post-operative surveillance and may be more likely to require salvage therapies.

Patient Reported Outcomes of Transperineal Prostate Biopsy With Tumescent Local Anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE: To report the outcomes of performing transperineal prostate biopsy in the office setting using the novel anesthetic technique of tumescent local anesthesia. We report anxiety, pain, and embarrassment of patients who underwent this procedure compared to patients who underwent a transrectal prostate biopsy using standard local anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing either a transperineal prostate biopsy under tumescent local anesthesia or a transrectal prostate biopsy with standard local anesthetic technique were prospectively enrolled. The tumescent technique employed dilute lidocaine solution administered using a self-filling syringe. Patients were asked to rate their pain before, during, and after their procedure using a visual analog scale. Patient anxiety and embarrassment was assessed using the Testing Modalities Index Questionnaire. RESULTS: Between April 2021 and June 2022, 430 patients underwent a transperineal prostate biopsy using tumescent local anesthesia and 65 patients underwent a standard transrectal prostate biopsy. Patients who underwent a transperineal biopsy had acceptable but significantly higher pain scores than those who underwent a transrectal prostate biopsy (3.9 vs 1.6, P-value <.01). These scores fell to almost zero immediately following their procedure. Additionally, transperineal biopsy patients were more likely to experience anxiety (71% vs 45%, P < .01) and embarrassment (32% vs 15%, P < .01). CONCLUSION: Transperineal biopsy using local tumescent anesthesia is safe and well-tolerated. Despite the benefits, patients undergoing a transperineal prostate biopsy under tumescent anesthesia still experienced worse procedural pain, anxiety, and embarrassment. Additional studies examining other adjunctive interventions to improve patient experience during transperineal prostate biopsy are needed.

Comparison of primary payer in cancer registry and discharge data.

OBJECTIVES: To determine agreement between variables capturing the primary payer at cancer diagnosis across the Pennsylvania Cancer Registry (PCR) and statewide facility discharge records (Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council [PHC4]) for adults younger than 65 years, and to specifically examine factors associated with misclassification of Medicaid status in the registry given the role of managed care. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the primary cancer cases among adults aged 21 to 64 years in the PCR from 2010 to 2016 linked to the PHC4 facility visit records. METHODS: We assessed agreement of payer at diagnosis (Medicare, Medicaid, private, other, uninsured, unknown) across data sources, including positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity, using the PHC4 records as the gold standard. The probability of misclassifying Medicaid in registry was estimated using multivariate logit models. RESULTS: Agreement of payers was high for private insurance (PPV, 89.7%; sensitivity, 83.6%), but there was misclassification and/or underreporting of Medicaid in the registry (PPV, 80%; sensitivity, 58%). Among cases with "other" and "unknown" insurance, 73.8% and 62.1%, respectively, had private insurance according to the PHC4 records. Medicaid managed care was associated with a statistically significant increase of 12.6 percentage points (95% CI, 9.4-15.8) in the probability of misclassifying Medicaid enrollment as private insurance in the registry. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest caution in conducting and interpreting research using insurance variables in cancer registries.

A Multipronged Intervention to Reduce Readmissions and Readmission Intensity After Radical Cystectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a multipronged, evidence-based protocol to reduce readmission risk and readmission intensity, as represented by the duration of the index readmission, after radical cystectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A per-protocol study was performed. The protocol included preoperative nutritional supplementation, early stent removal, and a follow-up phone call within 4-5days of discharge. The preprotocol period was from February 1, 2020 to July 31, 2021 and the postprotocol period was from December 1, 2020 to November 31, 2021. Using multivariate regression models, we compared outcomes among patients treated with radical cystectomy before and after protocol initiation. RESULTS: We identified 70 preprotocol patients and 126 postprotocol patients. After adjusting for age, sex, BMI, and frailty score, there was a significant reduction in 90-day readmission intensity (7 vs 5days; P = .048) among postprotocol patients. CONCLUSION: After implementation of an evidence-based protocol for patients undergoing radical 90-day readmission intensity decreased significantly. This protocol may move the needle forward on reducing readmissions, but a larger randomized trial is needed.

Partial Nephrectomy Drives the Association Between High-volume Centers and Decreased Mortality: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand the association between high-volume surgical kidney cancer centers and decreased mortality. To identify quality metrics that mediate this association. METHODS: We designed a cohort of 14,044 patients who were diagnosed with kidney cancer between 2004 and 2013 and underwent a partial or radical nephrectomy using SEER-Medicare data. Hospitals were divided into quartiles based on their total nephrectomy volume for the study period. We investigated 6 quality metrics as potential mediators of the association between hospital volume and mortality using a mediation model. RESULTS: At the highest volume centers, survival was higher at 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year time intervals, respectively (91% vs 89%, 80% vs 76%, 70% vs 66%, 45% vs 38%, P < .001) compared to the lowest quartile nephrectomy centers. Receipt of partial nephrectomy for stage ≤T1a tumors explains 52.3% of the total association between hospital nephrectomy volume and mortality. Additionally, patients at the highest-volume centers were more likely to be younger (20% vs 26% 80≤ years old, P < .001), white (82% vs 78%, P < .001), reside in more densely populated counties (≥1 million residents, 62% vs 42%, P > .001), have a shorter mean length of stay (5.03 vs 5.88days, P < .001) when compared to those in the lowest-volume quartile. CONCLUSION: This analysis of SEER-Medicare data is the first to suggest that partial nephrectomy in the setting of T1a tumors mediates the association between hospital volume and mortality. Quality metrics that reduce mortality should be harnessed to develop more efficient and higher-quality health systems.

Patterns of multispecialty care for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer in the use of active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary models of care have been advocated for prostate cancer (PC) to promote shared decision-making and facilitate quality care. Yet, how this model applies to low-risk disease where the preferred management is expectant remains unclear. Accordingly, we examined recent practice patterns in specialty visits for low/intermediate-risk PC and resultant use of active surveillance (AS). METHODS: Using SEER-Medicare, we ascertained whether patients saw urology and radiation oncology (i.e., multispecialty care) versus urology alone, based on self-designated specialty codes, for newly diagnosed PC from 2010 to 2017. We also examined the association with AS, defined as the absence of treatment within 12 months of diagnosis. Time trends were analyzed using Cochran-Armitage test. Chi-squared and logistic regression analyses were applied to compare sociodemographic and clinicopathologic characteristics between these models of care. RESULTS: The proportion of patients seeing both specialists was 35.5% and 46.5% for low- and intermediate-risk patients respectively. Trend analysis showed a decline in multispecialty care in low-risk patients (44.1% to 25.3% years 2010-2017; P < 0.001). Between 2010 and 2017, the use of AS increased 40.9% to 68.6% (P < 0.001) and 13.1% to 24.6% (P < 0.001) for patients seeing urology and those seeing both specialists respectively. Age, urban residence, higher education, SEER region, co-morbidities, frailty, Gleason score, predicted receipt of multispecialty care (all P < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of AS among men with low-risk PC has occurred primarily under the purview of urologists. While selection is certainly at play, these data suggest that multispecialty care may not be required to promote the utilization of AS for men with low-risk PC.

Use of expectant management based on prostate cancer risk and health status: How far are we from a risk-adapted approach?

OBJECTIVES: While active surveillance, a form of expectant management (EM), is preferred for patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa), some favor a more risk-adapted approach that recognizes patient preferences and condition-specific factors. However, previous research has shown non-patient-related factors often drive PCa treatment. In this context, we characterized trends in AS with respect to disease risk and health status. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using SEER-Medicare data, we identified men 66 years and older diagnosed with localized low- and intermediate-risk PCa from 2008 to 2017 and examined receipt of EM, defined as the absence of treatment (i.e., surgery, cryotherapy, radiation, chemotherapy, and androgen deprivation therapies) within 1 year of diagnosis. We performed bivariable analysis to compare trends in use for EM vs. treatment, stratified by disease risk (i.e., Gleason 3+3, 3+4, 4+3; PSA<10, 10-20) and health status (i.e., NCI Comorbidity Index (NCI), frailty, life expectancy). We then ran a multivariable logistic regression model to examine determinants of EM. RESULTS: Within this cohort, 26,364 (38%) were categorized as low-risk (i.e., Gleason 3+3 and PSA<10) and 43,520 (62%) as intermediate-risk (i.e., all others). Over the study period, use of EM significantly increased across all risk groups, except for Gleason 4+3 (P = 0.662), as well across all health status groups. However, linear trends did not differ significantly between frail vs. nonfrail patients for both those categorized as low-risk (P = 0.446) and intermediate-risk (P = 0.208). Trends also did not differ between NCI 0 vs. 1 vs. >1 for low-risk PCa (P = 0.395). In the multivariable models, EM was associated with increasing age and being frail for men with both low- and intermediate risk disease. Conversely, EM selection was negatively associated with higher comorbidity score. CONCLUSIONS: EM increased significantly over time for patients with low- and favorable intermediate-risk disease, with the most notable differences based on age and Gleason score. In contrast, trends in uptake of EM did not differ substantively by health status, suggesting that physicians may not be effectively incorporating patient health into PCa treatment decisions. Additional work is needed to develop interventions that recognize health status as an essential component of a risk-adapted approach.

Barriers to rural health care from the provider perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Rural populations routinely rank poorly on common health indicators. While it is understood that rural residents face barriers to health care, the exact nature of these barriers remains unclear. To further define these barriers, a qualitative study of primary care physicians practicing in rural communities was performed. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with primary care physicians practicing in rural areas within western Pennsylvania, the third largest rural population within the USA, using purposively sampling. Data were then transcribed, coded, and analyzed by thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three key themes emerged from the analysis addressing barriers to rural health care: (1) cost and insurance, (2) geographic dispersion, and (3) provider shortage and burnout. Providers mentioned strategies that they either employed or thought would be beneficial for their rural communities: (1) subsidize services, (2) establish mobile and satellite clinics (particularly for specialty care), (3) increase utilization of telehealth, (4) improve infrastructure for ancillary patient support (ie social work services), and (5) increase utilization of advanced practice providers. CONCLUSION: There are numerous barriers to providing rural communities with quality health care. Barriers that are encountered are multidimensional. Patients are unable to obtain the care they need because of cost-related barriers. More providers need to be recruited to rural areas to combat the shortage and burnout. Advanced care-delivery methods such as telehealth, satellite clinics, or advanced practice providers can help bridge the gaps caused by geographic dispersion. Policy efforts should target all these aspects in order to appropriately address rural healthcare needs.

Insurance Type and Area Deprivation Are Associated With Worse Overall Mortality for Patients With Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of area-level socioeconomic status, rural-urban residence, and type of insurance with overall and cancer-specific mortality among patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. METHODS: Using the Pennsylvania Cancer Registry, which collects demographic, insurance, and clinical information on every patient with cancer within the state, we identified all patients diagnosed with non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer between 2010 and 2016 based on clinical and pathologic staging. We used the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) as a surrogate for socioeconomic status and Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes to classify urban, large town, and rural communities. ADI was reported in quartiles, with 4 representing the lowest socioeconomic status. We fit multivariable logistic regression and Cox models to assess the relationship of these social determinants with overall and cancer-specific survival adjusting for age, sex, race, stage, treatment, rural-urban classification, insurance and ADI. RESULTS: We identified 2597 patients with non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer. On multivariable analysis, Medicare (hazards ratio [HR] 1.15), Medicaid (HR 1.38), ADI 3 (HR 1.16) and ADI 4 (HR 1.21) were independent predictors of greater overall mortality (all P < 0.05). Female sex and receipt of non-standard treatment were associated with increased overall mortality and bladder cancer-specific mortality. There was no significant difference in both overall and cancer-specific survival between patients who were non-Hispanic White compared to non-White or between those from urban areas, large towns, or rural locations. CONCLUSION: Lower socioeconomic status and Medicare and Medicaid insurance were associated with a greater risk of overall mortality while rural residence was not a significant factor. Implementation of public health programs may help reduce the gap in mortality for low SES at-risk populations.

Changes in Urologic Cancer Surgical Volume and Length of Stay During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Pennsylvania.

Importance: Disruptions in cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic led to widespread deferrals and cancellations, creating a surgical backlog that presents a challenge for health care institutions moving into the recovery phase of the pandemic. Objective: To describe patterns in surgical volume and postoperative length of stay for major urologic cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study identified 24 001 patients 18 years or older from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council database with kidney cancer, prostate cancer, or bladder cancer who received a radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy, radical prostatectomy, or radical cystectomy between the first quarter (Q1) of 2016 and Q2 of 2021. Postoperative length of stay and adjusted surgical volumes were compared before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was adjusted surgical volume for radical and partial nephrectomy, radical prostatectomy, and radical cystectomy during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary outcome was postoperative length of stay. Results: A total of 24 001 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.1 [9.4] years; 3522 women [15%], 19 845 White patients [83%], 17 896 living in urban areas [75%]) received major urologic cancer surgery between Q1 of 2016 and Q2 of 2021. Of these, 4896 radical nephrectomy, 3508 partial nephrectomy, 13 327 radical prostatectomy, and 2270 radical cystectomy surgical procedures were performed. There were no statistically significant differences in patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, urban or rural status, or Elixhauser Comorbidity Index scores between patients who received surgery before and patients who received surgery during the pandemic. For partial nephrectomy, a baseline of 168 surgeries per quarter decreased to 137 surgeries per quarter in Q2 and Q3 of 2020. For radical prostatectomy, a baseline of 644 surgeries per quarter decreased to 527 surgeries per quarter in Q2 and Q3 of 2020. However, the likelihood of receiving radical nephrectomy (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78-1.28), partial nephrectomy (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.77-1.27), radical prostatectomy (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.22-3.22), or radical cystectomy (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.31-1.53) was unchanged. Length of stay for partial nephrectomy decreased from baseline by a mean of 0.7 days (95% CI, -1.2 to -0.2 days) during the pandemic. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests that partial nephrectomy and radical prostatectomy surgical volume decreased during the peak waves of COVID-19, as did postoperative length of stay for partial nephrectomy.

Utilizing a Questionnaire to Implement a Risk-based Antibiotic Prophylaxis Protocol for Transrectal Prostate Biopsy.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a risk-based antibiotic prophylaxis protocol for patients undergoing transrectal prostate biopsy. METHODS: We created a risk-based protocol for antibiotic prophylaxis before transrectal prostate biopsy. Patients were screened for infection risk-factors with a self-administered questionnaire. The protocol was implemented from January 1, 2020 to March 31, 2020. We compared patient risk-factors, antibiotic regimens, and 30-day infection rates for patients undergoing transrectal prostate biopsies during the intervention and for a 3-month period before the intervention. RESULTS: There were 116 prostate biopsies in the preintervention group and 104 in the intervention group. Although there was no significant difference in the number of high-risk patients between the 2 groups (48% vs 55%; P = .33), the percentage of patients treated with augmented prophylaxis decreased from 74% to 45% (P = 0.03). The duration of antibiotic administration and the median number of doses prescribed also decreased significantly. Despite significant decreases in antibiotic use, there were no differences in infection rates (5% vs 5%; P = .90) or sepsis rates (1% vs 2%; P = .60). CONCLUSION: We developed a risk-based protocol for prophylactic antibiotics before prostate biopsy. The protocol was associated with less antibiotic use but did not lead to an increase in infectious complications.

Variation in Statewide Intravesical Treatment Rates for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer During the Bacillus Calmette-Guerin Drug Shortage.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the changes in treatment patterns for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer before and during the Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) drug shortage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries and identified 7971 bladder cancer patients (2648 pre-BCG shortage and 5323 during the shortage) ≥66 years of age who received intravesical treatment within 1 year of diagnosis between 2010 and 2017. The BCG shortage period was defined from July 2012 ongoing. Full induction treatment with BCG, mitomycin C, gemcitabine, or other intravesical agents was defined as receiving ≥5 of 6 treatments within 60 days. State-level BCG use before and during the drug shortage was compared in US states reporting at least 50 patients in each period. Independent variables included year of index date, age, sex, race, rurality, and region of residence. RESULTS: BCG utilization rates decreased 5.9% in the shortage period (95% CI (-8.2%)-(-3.7%)). The proportion of patients that completed a full induction course of BCG decreased from 31.0% in the pre-shortage period to 27.6% in the shortage period (P = .002). 84% of reporting states (16 of 19) had decreased BCG utilization ranging between 5% and 36% compared to pre-shortage rates. CONCLUSION: During the BCG drug shortage, eligible bladder cancer patients were less likely to receive gold standard intravesical BCG with a large variation in treatment patterns between US states.

Large Variations in the Prices of Urologic Procedures at Academic Medical Centers 1 Year After Implementation of the Price Transparency Final Rule.

Importance: Patients with urologic diseases often experience financial toxicity, defined as high levels of financial burden and concern, after receiving care. The Price Transparency Final Rule, which requires hospitals to disclose both the commercial and cash prices for at least 300 services, was implemented to facilitate price shopping, decrease price dispersion, and lower health care costs. Objective: To evaluate compliance with the Price Transparency Final Rule and to quantify variations in the price of urologic procedures among academic hospitals and by insurance class. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a cross-sectional study that determined the prices of 5 common urologic procedures among academic medical centers and by insurance class. Prices were obtained from the Turquoise Health Database on March 24, 2022. Academic hospitals were identified from the Association of American Medical Colleges website. The 5 most common urologic procedures were cystourethroscopy, prostate biopsy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, transurethral resection of the prostate, and ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy. Using the corresponding Current Procedural Terminology codes, the Turquoise Health Database was queried to identify the cash price, Medicare price, Medicaid price, and commercial insurance price for these procedures. Exposures: The Price Transparency Final Rule, which went into effect January 1, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Variability in procedure price among academic medical centers and by insurance class (Medicare, Medicaid, commercial, and cash price). Results: Of 153 hospitals, only 20 (13%) listed a commercial price for all 5 procedures. The commercial price was reported most often for cystourethroscopy (86 hospitals [56%]) and least often for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (45 hospitals [29%]). The cash price was lower than the Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial price at 24 hospitals (16%). Prices varied substantially across hospitals for all 5 procedures. There were significant variations in the prices of cystoscopy (χ23 = 85.9; P = .001), prostate biopsy (χ23 = 64.6; P = .001), prostatectomy (χ23 = 24.4; P = .001), transurethral resection of the prostate (χ23 = 51.3; P = .001), and ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy (χ23 = 63.0; P = .001) by insurance type. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that, more than 1 year after the implementation of the Price Transparency Final Rule, there are still large variations in the prices of urologic procedures among academic hospitals and by insurance class. Currently, in certain situations, health care costs could be reduced if patients paid out of pocket. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services may improve price transparency by better enforcing penalties for noncompliance, increasing penalties, and ensuring that hospitals report prices in a way that is easy for patients to access and understand.

Opioid-Free Ureteroscopy: Are Academic Urologists Lagging Behind Private Practice?

OBJECTIVE: To examine overall trends in opioid prescribing after ureteroscopy and compared opioid use between private and academic practice settings. We also analyzed the potential for spillover effect from an unrelated opioid-reduction initiative for major oncologic surgery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all ureteroscopies performed within our system at four distinct time points from 2016-2019. We recorded the type and number of opioid pills prescribed and calculated oral morphine equivalents. Analysis included comparison between community and academic hospitals as well as pre- and post-initiative. RESULTS: 555 patients undergoing ureteroscopy and 29 attending surgeons were included in the analysis. The median prescription size per ureteroscopy decreased throughout the study period in both the private and academic settings. From 2016-2017, median oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) decreased from 60 to 0 in the private setting and remained at 0 for the duration of the study period. Opioid reduction in the academic setting lagged behind private practitioners but median OMEs did steadily decrease to 0 in 2019. No significant spillover effect was observed. CONCLUSION: Since 2016, opioid prescribing following ureteroscopy has decreased in both the private and academic practice settings. Notably, private practice urologists achieved a median of 0 opioids 2 years prior to academic urologists. These data suggest that, in some circumstances, academic institutions may have been slower to respond to the opioid epidemic.