4.7 Article

Regional Implicit Racial Bias and Rates of Breast Reconstruction, Complications, and Cost Among US Patients With Breast Cancer

Journal

JAMA NETWORK OPEN
Volume 6, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.25487

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined whether implicit racial bias is associated with disparities in breast reconstruction and found that regional variations in utilization exist but are not associated with implicit bias. The results suggest that collaboration, data collection systems, and collaboration with high-volume breast centers can improve utilization rates and quality of care for breast cancer patients.
IMPORTANCE Racial disparities influencing breast reconstruction have been well-researched; however, the role of implicit racial bias remains unknown. An analysis of the disparities in care for patients with breast cancer may serve as a policy target to increase the access and quality of care for underserved populations. OBJECTIVE To identify whether variations in implicit racial bias by region are associated with the differences in rates of immediate breast reconstruction, complications, and cost for White patients and patients from minoritized racial and ethnic groups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study used data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2009 to 2019. Adult female patients with a diagnosis of or genetic predisposition for breast cancer receiving immediate breast reconstruction at the time of mastectomy were included. Patients receiving both autologous free flap and implant-based reconstruction were included in this analysis. US Census Bureau data were extracted to compare rates of reconstruction proportionately. The Implicit Association Test (IAT) was used to classify whether implicit bias was associated with the primary outcome variables. Data were analyzed from April to November 2022. EXPOSURE IAT score by US Census Bureau geographic region. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Variables of interest included demographic data, rate of reconstruction, complications (reconstruction-specific and systemic), inpatient cost, and IAT score by region. Spearman correlation was used to determine associations between implicit racial bias and the reconstruction utilization rate for White patients and patients from minoritized racial and ethnic groups. Two-sample t tests were used to analyze differences in utilization, complications, and cost between the 2 groups. RESULTS A total of 52115 patients were included in our sample: 38487 were identified as White (mean [SD] age, 52.0 [0.7] years) and 13628 were identified as minoritized race and ethnicity (American Indian, Asian, Black, and Hispanic patients and patients with another race or ethnicity; mean [SD] age, 49.7 [10.5] years). Implicit bias was not associated with disparities in breast reconstruction rates, complications, or cost. Nonetheless, the White-to-minoritized race and ethnicity utilization ratio differed among the regions studied. Specifically, the reconstruction ratio for White patients to patients with minoritized race and ethnicity was highest for the East South Central Division, which includes Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee (2.17), and lowest for the West South Central Division, which includes Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas (0.75). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study of patients with breast cancer, regional variation of implicit bias was not associated with differences in breast reconstruction utilization, complications, or cost. Regional disparities in utilization among racial and ethnic groups suggest that collaboration from individual institutions and national organizations is needed to develop robust data collection systems. Such systems could provide surgeons with a comparative view of their care. Additionally, collaboration with high-volume breast centers may help patients in low-resource settings receive the desired reconstruction for their breast cancer care, helping improve the utilization rate and quality of care.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available