Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Detection & Screening III1 Apr 2016MP21-07 THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND PSA SCREENING PRACTICES: ANALYSIS OF RACIAL SUBGROUPS Alexander Cole, Christian Meyer, Malte Vetterlein, Björn Löppenberg, Adam Kibel, Firas Abdollah, Jeffrey Leow, Thomas Seisen, Michael Zavaski, Maxine Sun, Jesse Sammon, and Quoc-Dien Trinh Alexander ColeAlexander Cole More articles by this author , Christian MeyerChristian Meyer More articles by this author , Malte VetterleinMalte Vetterlein More articles by this author , Björn LöppenbergBjörn Löppenberg More articles by this author , Adam KibelAdam Kibel More articles by this author , Firas AbdollahFiras Abdollah More articles by this author , Jeffrey LeowJeffrey Leow More articles by this author , Thomas SeisenThomas Seisen More articles by this author , Michael ZavaskiMichael Zavaski More articles by this author , Maxine SunMaxine Sun More articles by this author , Jesse SammonJesse Sammon More articles by this author , and Quoc-Dien TrinhQuoc-Dien Trinh More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.641AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The incidence and disease characteristics at presentation of prostate cancer varies according to race. Surprisingly little, however, is known about PSA screening practices according to race. The Affordable Care Act of 2010 introduced many provisions which may affect cancer screening practices among racial minorities with limited access to care due to lack of insurance. We aim to study the differences in PSA screening prevalence according to race prior and following the Affordable Care Act. METHODS The NHIS is an in-person household survey, with multistage area probability sampling to provide a representative sample of the US population with response rates of approximately 80%. We queried the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) adult sample file 2008 and 2013 to assess the prevalence of PSA screening. Individuals with a prior history of prostate cancer or if the visit was for “problems” or “other reasons” were excluded. Differences between screening practice and race was determined using a difference-in-differences approach. Results were weighted to account for the complex samples design. RESULTS A total of 8,601 patients were surveyed. Although unadjusted screening rates decreased significantly in each racial subgroup (40 to 31.8% in Whites, 36.6 to 27.6 in Blacks, 28.7 to 20.8 in Hispanics, 28.9 to 18.3 in other races), adjusted multivariable regression revealed a significant decrease in Hispanics only (OR 0.21 (0.04-0.99). Difference-in-differences between the racial groups were not significantly different from each other. CONCLUSIONS PSA screening has decreased for all races between 2008 and 2013, most significantly among Hispanics. Improved access to screening services as part of the Affordable Care Act were likely outweighed by the new 2012 United States Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against PSA screening. © 2016FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 195Issue 4SApril 2016Page: e247 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2016MetricsAuthor Information Alexander Cole More articles by this author Christian Meyer More articles by this author Malte Vetterlein More articles by this author Björn Löppenberg More articles by this author Adam Kibel More articles by this author Firas Abdollah More articles by this author Jeffrey Leow More articles by this author Thomas Seisen More articles by this author Michael Zavaski More articles by this author Maxine Sun More articles by this author Jesse Sammon More articles by this author Quoc-Dien Trinh More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.