Sierra M. Silverwood BA , Kathleen Waeldner BA , Sasha K. Demeulenaere BS , Shavit Keren BA , Jason To BS , Jie Jane Chen MD , Zakaria El Kouzi MD , Alan Ayoub MD , Surbhi Grover MD , Katie E. Lichter MD, MPH , Osama Mohamad MD, PhD
{"title":"The Relationship Between Travel Distance for Treatment and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy: A Systematic Review","authors":"Sierra M. Silverwood BA , Kathleen Waeldner BA , Sasha K. Demeulenaere BS , Shavit Keren BA , Jason To BS , Jie Jane Chen MD , Zakaria El Kouzi MD , Alan Ayoub MD , Surbhi Grover MD , Katie E. Lichter MD, MPH , Osama Mohamad MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.adro.2024.101652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Although recent technological advances in radiation therapy have significantly improved treatment outcomes, the global distribution of radiation therapy is unbalanced, making access especially challenging for patients in rural or low-resource settings because of travel burden. This systematic review aimed to explore the impact of geographic distance to treatment facilities on survival, as well as other treatment outcomes, among patients undergoing radiation therapy.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><div>A search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science) was performed. Studies were included if they were primary literature, published between May 2000 and May 2023, and reported the travel distances for patients undergoing radiation therapy for malignant conditions and its influence on survival outcomes. Studies were excluded if they did not report primary outcomes, were published before 2000, or were non-English.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>After review, 23 studies were included. Most studies were conducted in the United States, with cervical cancer being the most frequently studied disease site. Data suggested that travel distances vary significantly, with patients often traveling a median distance of 20 miles to radiation therapy. Among the studies, 5 reported a negative impact on overall survival, often associating greater travel with nonadherence to recommended care. Other survival metrics, including progression-free survival and all-cause mortality, were also assessed, demonstrating similar variability in relation to travel distance. Conversely, seven studies found no significant impact on overall survival, and four suggested a positive impact on overall survival, with improved outcomes at centers with higher case volumes. Some data also revealed an inverse correlation between travel distance and the likelihood of receiving guideline-concordant radiation therapy.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The impact of travel distance on radiation therapy outcomes is varied. Our findings underscore the challenges posed by travel in accessing radiation therapy and the disparities affecting particular patient demographic groups. Additional studies are needed to thoroughly assess the impacts of geographic disparities and to identify effective measures to address these challenges.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7390,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","volume":"9 12","pages":"Article 101652"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S245210942400215X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
Although recent technological advances in radiation therapy have significantly improved treatment outcomes, the global distribution of radiation therapy is unbalanced, making access especially challenging for patients in rural or low-resource settings because of travel burden. This systematic review aimed to explore the impact of geographic distance to treatment facilities on survival, as well as other treatment outcomes, among patients undergoing radiation therapy.
Methods and Materials
A search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science) was performed. Studies were included if they were primary literature, published between May 2000 and May 2023, and reported the travel distances for patients undergoing radiation therapy for malignant conditions and its influence on survival outcomes. Studies were excluded if they did not report primary outcomes, were published before 2000, or were non-English.
Results
After review, 23 studies were included. Most studies were conducted in the United States, with cervical cancer being the most frequently studied disease site. Data suggested that travel distances vary significantly, with patients often traveling a median distance of 20 miles to radiation therapy. Among the studies, 5 reported a negative impact on overall survival, often associating greater travel with nonadherence to recommended care. Other survival metrics, including progression-free survival and all-cause mortality, were also assessed, demonstrating similar variability in relation to travel distance. Conversely, seven studies found no significant impact on overall survival, and four suggested a positive impact on overall survival, with improved outcomes at centers with higher case volumes. Some data also revealed an inverse correlation between travel distance and the likelihood of receiving guideline-concordant radiation therapy.
Conclusions
The impact of travel distance on radiation therapy outcomes is varied. Our findings underscore the challenges posed by travel in accessing radiation therapy and the disparities affecting particular patient demographic groups. Additional studies are needed to thoroughly assess the impacts of geographic disparities and to identify effective measures to address these challenges.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of Advances is to provide information for clinicians who use radiation therapy by publishing: Clinical trial reports and reanalyses. Basic science original reports. Manuscripts examining health services research, comparative and cost effectiveness research, and systematic reviews. Case reports documenting unusual problems and solutions. High quality multi and single institutional series, as well as other novel retrospective hypothesis generating series. Timely critical reviews on important topics in radiation oncology, such as side effects. Articles reporting the natural history of disease and patterns of failure, particularly as they relate to treatment volume delineation. Articles on safety and quality in radiation therapy. Essays on clinical experience. Articles on practice transformation in radiation oncology, in particular: Aspects of health policy that may impact the future practice of radiation oncology. How information technology, such as data analytics and systems innovations, will change radiation oncology practice. Articles on imaging as they relate to radiation therapy treatment.