Hari S. Iyer, Kevin H. Kensler, Charlotte Roscoe, Chidinma Opara, Mingchao He, Evan Kovac, Isla P. Garraway, Quoc Dien-Trinh, Timothy R. Rebbeck
{"title":"前列腺特异性抗原检测的多维医疗访问障碍:2006 至 2020 年美国全国小组研究》。","authors":"Hari S. Iyer, Kevin H. Kensler, Charlotte Roscoe, Chidinma Opara, Mingchao He, Evan Kovac, Isla P. Garraway, Quoc Dien-Trinh, Timothy R. Rebbeck","doi":"10.1002/cam4.70358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Rising metastatic prostate cancer incidence has renewed debate regarding benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Identifying barriers to accessing screening for individuals at high risk of lethal prostate cancer may slow this rise. We examined associations of access barriers with receipt of PSA testing, stratified by sociodemographic factors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We pooled data from male respondents to Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance Systems (BRFSS) surveys from 2006 to 2020. Questions related to affordability (insurance, cost of visits) and accommodation (regular primary care provider (PCP), physician recommending a PSA test) were considered as individual-level barriers. For availability, we linked provider density from the 2012 Area Health Resource File and estimated driving times to closest health facility within Micropolitan and Metropolitan Statistical Area (MMSA) using Google Earth Engine. These measures were used to compute a spatial accessibility index. We fit survey-weighted, covariate-adjusted logistic regression models to estimate associations of barriers with receipt of PSA within the past 2 years and examined effect modification by sociodemographic factors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>There were 185,643 participants, of whom 73% were White, 11% were Black, 4% were Asian, and 11% were Hispanic. Physician recommendation was the strongest predictor of having a PSA test (aOR: 14.5, 95% CI: 13.6, 15.6). Not having a regular PCP (aOR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.31), insurance (aOR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.71), and prohibitive cost of care (aOR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.90) were associated with lower PSA testing. Access barriers were stronger predictors of PSA testing for Asian and White participants compared to other groups (<i>P</i><sub>het</sub> < 0.004 for insurance and regular PCP) and for those with college education compared to those without (<i>P</i><sub>het</sub> < 0.05 for insurance, perceived unaffordability).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Discussion</h3>\n \n <p>Physician recommendation was the strongest predictor of receipt of PSA testing, regardless of sociodemographic grouping. Future studies should consider access barriers jointly and across sociodemographic strata.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":139,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Medicine","volume":"13 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538963/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multidimensional Healthcare Access Barriers to Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing: A Nation-Wide Panel Study in the United States From 2006 to 2020\",\"authors\":\"Hari S. Iyer, Kevin H. Kensler, Charlotte Roscoe, Chidinma Opara, Mingchao He, Evan Kovac, Isla P. Garraway, Quoc Dien-Trinh, Timothy R. Rebbeck\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cam4.70358\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Rising metastatic prostate cancer incidence has renewed debate regarding benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Identifying barriers to accessing screening for individuals at high risk of lethal prostate cancer may slow this rise. We examined associations of access barriers with receipt of PSA testing, stratified by sociodemographic factors.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We pooled data from male respondents to Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance Systems (BRFSS) surveys from 2006 to 2020. Questions related to affordability (insurance, cost of visits) and accommodation (regular primary care provider (PCP), physician recommending a PSA test) were considered as individual-level barriers. For availability, we linked provider density from the 2012 Area Health Resource File and estimated driving times to closest health facility within Micropolitan and Metropolitan Statistical Area (MMSA) using Google Earth Engine. These measures were used to compute a spatial accessibility index. We fit survey-weighted, covariate-adjusted logistic regression models to estimate associations of barriers with receipt of PSA within the past 2 years and examined effect modification by sociodemographic factors.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>There were 185,643 participants, of whom 73% were White, 11% were Black, 4% were Asian, and 11% were Hispanic. Physician recommendation was the strongest predictor of having a PSA test (aOR: 14.5, 95% CI: 13.6, 15.6). Not having a regular PCP (aOR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.31), insurance (aOR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.71), and prohibitive cost of care (aOR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.90) were associated with lower PSA testing. Access barriers were stronger predictors of PSA testing for Asian and White participants compared to other groups (<i>P</i><sub>het</sub> < 0.004 for insurance and regular PCP) and for those with college education compared to those without (<i>P</i><sub>het</sub> < 0.05 for insurance, perceived unaffordability).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Discussion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Physician recommendation was the strongest predictor of receipt of PSA testing, regardless of sociodemographic grouping. Future studies should consider access barriers jointly and across sociodemographic strata.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Medicine\",\"volume\":\"13 21\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538963/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70358\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70358","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Multidimensional Healthcare Access Barriers to Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing: A Nation-Wide Panel Study in the United States From 2006 to 2020
Background
Rising metastatic prostate cancer incidence has renewed debate regarding benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Identifying barriers to accessing screening for individuals at high risk of lethal prostate cancer may slow this rise. We examined associations of access barriers with receipt of PSA testing, stratified by sociodemographic factors.
Methods
We pooled data from male respondents to Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance Systems (BRFSS) surveys from 2006 to 2020. Questions related to affordability (insurance, cost of visits) and accommodation (regular primary care provider (PCP), physician recommending a PSA test) were considered as individual-level barriers. For availability, we linked provider density from the 2012 Area Health Resource File and estimated driving times to closest health facility within Micropolitan and Metropolitan Statistical Area (MMSA) using Google Earth Engine. These measures were used to compute a spatial accessibility index. We fit survey-weighted, covariate-adjusted logistic regression models to estimate associations of barriers with receipt of PSA within the past 2 years and examined effect modification by sociodemographic factors.
Results
There were 185,643 participants, of whom 73% were White, 11% were Black, 4% were Asian, and 11% were Hispanic. Physician recommendation was the strongest predictor of having a PSA test (aOR: 14.5, 95% CI: 13.6, 15.6). Not having a regular PCP (aOR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.31), insurance (aOR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.71), and prohibitive cost of care (aOR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.90) were associated with lower PSA testing. Access barriers were stronger predictors of PSA testing for Asian and White participants compared to other groups (Phet < 0.004 for insurance and regular PCP) and for those with college education compared to those without (Phet < 0.05 for insurance, perceived unaffordability).
Discussion
Physician recommendation was the strongest predictor of receipt of PSA testing, regardless of sociodemographic grouping. Future studies should consider access barriers jointly and across sociodemographic strata.
期刊介绍:
Cancer Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdisciplinary journal providing rapid publication of research from global biomedical researchers across the cancer sciences. The journal will consider submissions from all oncologic specialties, including, but not limited to, the following areas:
Clinical Cancer Research
Translational research ∙ clinical trials ∙ chemotherapy ∙ radiation therapy ∙ surgical therapy ∙ clinical observations ∙ clinical guidelines ∙ genetic consultation ∙ ethical considerations
Cancer Biology:
Molecular biology ∙ cellular biology ∙ molecular genetics ∙ genomics ∙ immunology ∙ epigenetics ∙ metabolic studies ∙ proteomics ∙ cytopathology ∙ carcinogenesis ∙ drug discovery and delivery.
Cancer Prevention:
Behavioral science ∙ psychosocial studies ∙ screening ∙ nutrition ∙ epidemiology and prevention ∙ community outreach.
Bioinformatics:
Gene expressions profiles ∙ gene regulation networks ∙ genome bioinformatics ∙ pathwayanalysis ∙ prognostic biomarkers.
Cancer Medicine publishes original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper.