Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
World Neurosurg ; 166: e915-e923, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35944857

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Interfacility transfers represent a large proportion of neurosurgical admissions to tertiary care centers each year. In this study, the authors examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of transfers, timing of transfers, demographic profile of transfer patients, and clinical outcomes including rates of surgical intervention. METHODS: A retrospective review of neurosurgical transfer patients at a single tertiary center was performed. Patients transferred from April to November 2020 (the "COVID Era") were compared with an institutional database of transfer patients collected before the COVID-19 pandemic (the "Pre-COVID Era"). During the COVID Era, both emergent and nonemergent neurosurgical services had resumed. A comparison of demographic and clinical factors between the 2 cohorts was performed. RESULTS: A total of 674 patients were included in the study (331 Pre-COVID and 343 COVID-Era patients). Overall, there was no change in the average monthly number of transfers (P = 0.66) or in the catchment area of referral hospitals. However, COVID-Era patients were more likely to be uninsured (1% vs. 4%), had longer transfer times (COVID vs. Pre-COVID Era: 18 vs. 9 hours; P < 0.001), required higher rates of surgical intervention (63% vs. 50%, P = 0.001), had higher rates of spine pathology (17% vs. 10%), and less frequently were admitted to the intensive care unit (34% vs. 52%, P < 0.001). Overall, COVID-Era patients did not experience delays to surgical intervention (3.1 days vs. 3.6 days, P = 0.2). When analyzing the subgroup of COVID-Era patients, COVID infection status did not impact the time of transfer or rates of operation, although COVID-infected patients experienced a longer time to surgery after admission (14 vs. 2.9 days, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic did not reduce the number of monthly transfers, operation rates, or catchment area for transfer patients. Transfer rates of uninsured patients increased during the COVID Era, potentially reflecting changes in access to community neurosurgery care. Shorter time to surgery seen in COVID-Era patients possibly reflects institutional policies that improved operating room efficiency to compensate for surgical backlogs. COVID status affeted time to surgery, reflecting the preoperative care that these patients require before intervention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neurosurgery , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Transfer , Retrospective Studies , Tertiary Care Centers
2.
Neuro Oncol ; 24(8): 1341-1349, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34999844

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The NIH Revitalization Act, implemented 29 years ago, set to improve the representation of women and minorities in clinical trials. In this study, we investigate progress made in all phase therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial CNS tumors stratified by demographic-specific age-adjusted disease incidence and mortality. Additionally, we identify workforce characteristics associated with clinical trials meeting established accrual benchmarks. METHODS: Registry study of published clinical trials for World Health Organization defined neuroepithelial CNS tumors between January 2000 and December 2019. Study participants were obtained from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Population-based data originated from the CBTRUS for incidence analyses. SEER-18 Incidence-Based Mortality data was used for mortality analysis. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact, and χ 2 tests were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Among 662 published clinical trials representing 49 907 participants, 62.5% of participants were men and 37.5% women (P < .0001) representing a mortality specific over-accrual for men (P = .001). Whites, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics represented 91.7%, 1.5%, 2.6%, and 1.7% of trial participants. Compared with mortality, Blacks (47% of expected mortality, P = .008), Hispanics (17% of expected mortality, P < .001) and Asians (33% of expected mortality, P < .001) were underrepresented compared with Whites (114% of expected mortality, P < .001). Clinical trials meeting accrual benchmarks for race included minority authorship. CONCLUSIONS: Following the Revitalization Act, minorities and women remain underrepresented in therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial tumors, relative to disease incidence and mortality. Study accrual has improved with time. This study provides a framework for clinical trial accrual efforts and offers guidance regarding workforce considerations associated with enrollment of underserved patients.


Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic , Neoplasms , Patient Selection , Female , Humans , Male , Minority Groups , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Neoplasms/therapy , Research Design , United States
4.
J Neurooncol ; 148(1): 131-139, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32350780

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Under-enrollment in clinical trials significantly limits valid analyses of clinical interventions and generalizability of findings. Often it results in premature study termination, with estimates of 22% to 50% of clinical trials terminated due to poor accrual. Currently, there are limited reports addressing the influence of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status on clinical trial enrollment in adult glioma patients. The goal of this study was to test the hypothesis that race and socioeconomic status negatively impact therapeutic clinical trial enrollment. METHODS: 988 adult patients were identified from the UCSF Tumor Board Registry and analyzed to determine the rate of therapeutic clinical trial screening and study enrollment. RESULTS: At initial diagnosis, 43.6% and 17.5% of glioma patients were screened and enrolled in a therapeutic clinical trial, respectively. At recurrence, 49.8% and 26.3% of patients were screened and enrolled in a clinical trial, respectively. Thirty-three percent of the study population belonged to a NIH-designated underrepresented minority group; Asian/Pacific-Islander comprised 19.6% of the overall cohort. On univariate analysis, only in-state location, distance to the hospital, and WHO grade were associated with enrollment at initial diagnosis and recurrence. Minority status, insurance type, median household income, and percent below poverty were not associated with clinical trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Minority and socioeconomic status did not impact adult glioma clinical trial enrollment. Proximity to the tertiary care cancer center may be an important consideration for minority patients. Patient screening should be carefully considered in order to avoid bias based on minority and socioeconomic status.


Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms/therapy , Glioma/therapy , Patient Selection , Race Factors , Social Class , Clinical Trials as Topic , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...