Preventive care receipt and office visit use among breast and colorectal cancer survivors relative to age- and gender-matched cancer-free controls.

PURPOSE: We compare breast and colorectal cancer survivors' annual receipt of preventive care and office visits to that of age- and gender-matched cancer-free controls. METHODS: Automated data, including tumor registries, were used to identify insured individuals aged 50+ at the time of breast or colorectal cancer diagnosis between 2000 and 2008 as well as cancer-free controls receiving care from four integrated delivery systems. Those with metastatic or un-staged disease, or a prior cancer diagnosis were excluded. Annual visits to primary care, oncology, and surgery as well as receipt of mammography, colorectal cancer, Papanicolaou, bone densitometry, and cholesterol screening were observed for 5 years. We used generalized estimating equations that accounted for repeated observations over time per person to test annual service use differences by cancer survivor/cancer-free control status and whether survivor/cancer-free status associations were moderated by patient age <65 years and calendar year of diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 3743 breast and 1530 colorectal cancer survivors were identified, representing 12,923 and 5103 patient-years of follow-up, respectively. Compared to cancer-free controls, breast and colorectal cancer survivors were equally or more likely to use all types of office visits and to receive cancer screenings and bone densitometry testing. Both breast and colorectal cancer survivors were less likely than cancer-free controls to receive cholesterol testing, regardless of age, year of diagnosis, or use of primary care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Programs targeting cancer survivors may benefit from addressing a broad range of primary preventive care needs, including recommended cardiovascular disease screening.

Does payment drive procedures? Payment for specialty services and procedure rate variations in 3 HMOs.

OBJECTIVE: To study how payment for specialty services affects the rates of performance of invasive procedures by physicians in a number of specialties. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Administrative data from 1996-1997 and 1997-1998 from 3 large health maintenance organizations (HMOs) in the Midwestern and western United States were used to study variations in procedure rates associated with different methods of paying for cardiology, gastroenterology, ophthalmology, orthopedic, and ear, nose and throat services within each HMO. The age-, sex-, and comorbidity adjusted probabilities of undergoing selected, potentially discretionary procedures, were compared within each plan by payment method. RESULTS: After adjustment, rates under fee-for-service payment tended to be higher than those under capitation or salary payment, whereas there was no clear pattern for salary versus capitation payment. Even within a single specialty in a single plan, however, rates did not always follow the same pattern for different procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The payment method for specialty services used by these 3 health plans was variably associated with how likely patients were to undergo a variety of invasive procedures. The effects of contract payment methods for specialty services on health care costs, quality, and outcomes should be further studied, but such studies will challenge the capabilities of health plan data systems.