Urban-Rural Differences in Receipt of Cancer Surgery at High-Volume Hospitals and Sensitivity to Hospital Volume Thresholds

Methods for identifying high-volume hospitals affect conclusions about rural cancer care access.

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.

Potential Winners and Losers: Understanding How the Oncology Care Model May Differentially Affect Hospitals

PURPOSE

With the introduction of the Oncology Care Model and plans for the transition to Oncology Care First, alternative payment models (APMs) are an increasingly important piece of the oncology care landscape. Evidence is mixed on the Oncology Care Model's impact on utilization and costs, but as policymakers consider expansion of similar models, it is critical to understand the characteristics of hospitals that may be differentially affected.

METHODS

We used 2007-2016 SEER-Medicare data to identify patients with breast and prostate cancer receiving chemotherapy, endocrine therapy (breast), or androgen deprivation therapy (prostate). For each hospital, we calculated 6-month expected mortality, emergency department (ED) visits, inpatient admissions, and costs, all commonly collected APM outcomes. After calculating observed-to-expected rates for each outcome by hospital, we estimated the association between observed-to-expected rates and characteristics of each hospital to understand hospital characteristics that might be associated with higher- or lower-than-expected rates of each outcome.

RESULTS

Hospitals with > 15% rural patients had significantly higher-than-expected mortality (0.31 points higher, P < .001) and ED visit rates (0.10 points higher, P = .029) as well as significantly lower costs (0.06 points lower, P = .004). Hospitals unaffiliated with a medical school also experienced significantly higher-than-expected mortality and ED visits. Hospitals eligible for disproportionate share hospital payment experienced significantly higher ED visits but lower costs. For-profit hospitals experienced higher-than-expected mortality.

CONCLUSION

Rural hospitals and those unaffiliated with a medical school may require special consideration as APMs expand in oncology care. Designated cancer centers and larger hospitals may be advantaged.