3.9 Article

Distance to diagnosing provider as a measure of access for patients with melanoma

期刊

ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGY
卷 143, 期 8, 页码 991-998

出版社

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archderm.143.8.991

关键词

-

资金

  1. AHRQ HHS [T32 HS000032, T32 HS00032] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCI NIH HHS [R01 CA112243-03, R01 CA112243, K07 CA102096, U01 CA083180] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To examine the effect of travel distance and other sociodemographic factors on access to a diagnosing provider for patients with melanoma. Design: Analysis was performed of all incident cases of melanoma in 2000 from 42 North Carolina counties. Setting: Academic research. Participants: Patients and providers from 42 North Carolina counties were geocoded to street address. Main Outcome Measures: Associations between Breslow thickness and clinical and sociodemographic factors (age, sex, poverty rate, rurality, provider supply, and distance to diagnosing provider) were examined. Results: Of 643 eligible cases, 4.4% were excluded because of missing data. The median Breslow thickness was 0.6 mm (range, 0.1-20.0 mm). The median distance to diagnosing provider was 8 miles (range, 0-386 miles). For each 1-mile increase in distance, Breslow thickness increased by 0.6% (P=.003). For each 1% increase in poverty rate, Breslow thickness increased by 1% (P = .04). Breslow thickness was 19% greater for patients aged 51 to 80 years than for those aged 0 to 50 years (P = .02) and was 109% greater for patients older than 80 years than for those aged 0 to 50 years (P <.001). Sex, rurality, and supply of dermatologists were not associated with Breslow thickness. Conclusions: For patients with melanoma, distance to the diagnosing provider is a meaningful measure of access that captures different information than communitylevel measures of rurality, provider supply, and socioeconomic status. Future work should be targeted at identifying factors that may affect distance to diagnosing provider and serve as barriers to melanoma care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据