Racial and ethnic disparities in self-reported general and mental health status among colorectal cancer survivors: impact of sociodemographic factors and implications for mortality-a SEER-CAHPS study.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcomes are recognized as strong predictors of cancer prognosis. This study examines racial and ethnic differences in self-reported general health status (GHS) and mental health status (MHS) among patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of Medicare beneficiaries between 1998 and 2011 with non-distant CRC who underwent curative resection and completed a Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey within 6-36 months of CRC diagnosis. Analysis included a stepwise logistic regression to examine the relationship between race and ethnicity and fair or poor health status, and a proportional hazards model to determine the mortality risk associated with fair or poor health status. RESULTS: Of 1867 patients, Non-Hispanic Black (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.06-2.28) and Hispanic (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.04-2.11) patients had higher unadjusted odds for fair or poor GHS compared to Non-Hispanic White patients, also Hispanic patients had higher unadjusted odds for fair or poor MHS (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.23-3.01). These relationships persisted after adjusting for clinical factors but were attenuated after subsequently adjusting for sociodemographic factors. Compared to those reporting good to excellent health status, patients reporting fair or poor GHS or MHS had an increased mortality risk (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.31-1.76 and OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.34-1.99, respectively). CONCLUSION: Racial and ethnic differences in GHS and MHS reported after CRC diagnosis are mainly driven by sociodemographic factors and reflect a higher risk of mortality. Identifying unmet biopsychosocial needs is necessary to promote equitable care.

Experience of a single academic institution with the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer and the resulting improvement in care.

AIM: The American College of Surgeons Committee on Cancer developed the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer (NAPRC) to reduce variations in rectal cancer care, standardize clinical practice and encourage multidisciplinary approaches. The aim of this study was to analyse if accreditation achieved a higher quality of care at one hospital. METHOD: The University of California Davis Medical Center was accredited in 2019. A retrospective review of rectal adenocarcinoma patients was performed between the years 2013 and 2018. Patients presenting from 2013 to 2015 were discussed at a gastrointestinal tumour board while patients in 2018 had an accredited rectal cancer tumour board. Patients from 2016 to 2017 were excluded as the programme was still developing. Compliance to the NAPRC standards was compared between the cohorts. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty patients were evaluated, 88 (68%) in the prerectal tumour board cohort and 42 (32%) in the rectal tumour board cohort. The prerectal tumour board cohort often failed to meet attendance standards. All patients in the rectal tumour board cohort met all criteria. Similarly, clinical service compliance improved in the rectal tumour board cohort for 13 metrics, 10 of which were statistically significant. Although a high proportion of patients in both groups experienced quality surgery, i.e. complete total mesorectal excision and negative margins, the lack of complete pathological reporting in the prerectal tumour board cohort limited analysis. CONCLUSION: Multidisciplinary rectal cancer tumour boards are associated with improved compliance with recommended care by the NAPRC. Patients discussed at a rectal cancer tumour board were more likely to receive appropriate staging, coordinated care and have better clinical documentation.

Patient and provider perspectives to utilization of telemedicine in surgery.

Objectives: Determine patient and provider perspectives on widespread rapid telemedicine implementation, understand the key components of a surgical telemedicine visit and identify factors that affect future telemedicine use. Summary of background data: Compared to other specialties, the field of surgery heretofore has had limited adoption of telemedicine. During the COVID-19 pandemic Healthcare, including the surgical specialties, saw new widespread use of telemedicine. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study during the COVID-19 California stay-at-home and physical distancing executive orders. Utilization data were collected from clinics and compared to usage data during the same time 1 year later. All patients and providers who participated in a telemedicine visit during the study period were asked to complete a survey after each encounter and the surveys were analyzed for trends in opinions on future use by stakeholders. Results: Over the 10-week period, the median percentage of telemedicine visits per clinic was 33% (17%-51%) which peaked 3 weeks into implementation. One hundred and ninety-one patients (48% women) with a median age of 64 years (IQR 53-73) completed the patient survey. Patients were first-time participants in telemedicine in 41% (n = 79) of visits. Fifty-seven percent (n = 45) of first-time users preferred that future visits be in-person versus 31% of prior users (p = 0.007). The median travel time from home to the clinic was 40 min (IQR = 20-90). Patients with longer travel times were not more likely to use telemedicine in the future (61% with longer travel vs. 53% shorter, p = 0.11). From the 148 provider responses, 90% of the visits providers were able to create a definitive plan with the telemedicine visit. A physical exam was determined not to be needed in 45% of the visits. An attempt at any physical exam was not performed in 84% of routine follow-up or new-patient visits, compared to 53% of post-op visits (p = 0.001). Conclusion: Telemedicine is a viable ambulatory visit option for surgical specialists and their patients. During rapid telemedicine deployment, travel distance did not correlate with increased use of telemedicine, and in-person visits are still preferred. However, nearly half of all visits did not need a physical exam, which favors telemedicine use.