Skip Navigation LinksHome > December 2013 - Volume 51 - Issue 12 > The Impact of Technology Diffusion on Treatment for Prostate...
Medical Care:
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000019
Original Articles

The Impact of Technology Diffusion on Treatment for Prostate Cancer

Schroeck, Florian R. MD, MS*,†; Kaufman, Samuel R. MA*; Jacobs, Bruce L. MD, MPH*,†; Zhang, Yun PhD*; Weizer, Alon Z. MD, MS; Montgomery, Jeffrey S. MD, MHSA; Gilbert, Scott M. MD, MS; Strope, Seth A. MD, MPH§; Hollenbeck, Brent K. MD, MS*,†

Supplemental Author Material
Collapse Box

Abstract

Background:

The use of local therapy for prostate cancer may increase because of the perceived advantages of new technologies such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and robotic prostatectomy.

Objective:

To examine the association of market-level technological capacity with receipt of local therapy.

Design:

Retrospective cohort.

Subjects:

Patients with localized prostate cancer who were diagnosed between 2003 and 2007 (n=59,043) from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results—Medicare database.

Measures:

We measured the capacity for delivering treatment with new technology as the number of providers offering robotic prostatectomy or IMRT per population in a market (hospital referral region). The association of this measure with receipt of prostatectomy, radiotherapy, or observation was examined with multinomial logistic regression.

Results:

For each 1000 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, 174 underwent prostatectomy, 490 radiotherapy, and 336 were observed. Markets with high robotic prostatectomy capacity had higher use of prostatectomy (146 vs. 118 per 1000 men, P=0.008) but a trend toward decreased use of radiotherapy (574 vs. 601 per 1000 men, P=0.068), resulting in a stable rate of local therapy. High versus low IMRT capacity did not significantly impact the use of prostatectomy (129 vs. 129 per 1000 men, P=0.947) and radiotherapy (594 vs. 585 per 1000 men, P=0.579).

Conclusions:

Although there was a small shift from radiotherapy to prostatectomy in markets with high robotic prostatectomy capacity, increased capacity for both robotic prostatectomy and IMRT did not change the overall rate of local therapy. Our findings temper concerns that the new technology spurs additional therapy of prostate cancer.

Copyright © 2013 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Login

Article Tools

Share

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.