BACKGROUND:Racial disparities in general surgical outcomes are known to exist but not well understood.OBJECTIVES:To determine if black-white disparities in general surgery mortality for Medicare patients are attributable to poorer health status among blacks on admission or differences in the quality of care provided by the admitting hospitals.RESEARCH DESIGN:Matched cohort study using Tapered Multivariate Matching.SUBJECTS:All black elderly Medicare general surgical patients (N=18,861) and white-matched controls within the same 6 states or within the same 838 hospitals.MEASURES:Thirty-day mortality (primary); others include in-hospital mortality, failure-to-rescue, complications, length of stay, and readmissions.RESULTS:Matching on age, sex, year, state, and the exact same procedure, blacks had higher 30-day mortality (4.0% vs. 3.5%, P<0.01), in-hospital mortality (3.9% vs. 2.9%, P<0.0001), in-hospital complications (64.3% vs. 56.8% P<0.0001), and failure-to-rescue rates (6.1% vs. 5.1%, P<0.001), longer length of stay (7.2 vs. 5.8 d, P<0.0001), and more 30-day readmissions (15.0% vs. 12.5%, P<0.0001). Adding preoperative risk factors to the above match, there was no significant difference in mortality or failure-to-rescue, and all other outcome differences were small. Blacks matched to whites in the same hospital displayed no significant differences in mortality, failure-to-rescue, or readmissions.CONCLUSIONS:Black and white Medicare patients undergoing the same procedures with closely matched risk factors displayed similar mortality, suggesting that racial disparities in general surgical mortality are not because of differences in hospital quality. To reduce the observed disparities in surgical outcomes, the poorer health of blacks on presentation for surgery must be addressed.

The incidence of colon cancer is highest among black persons, and there are racial disparities in survival among patients with colon cancer. In this study, the authors aimed to determine the extent...

Background: Differences in colon cancer survival by race are a recognized problem among Medicare beneficiaries.Objective: To determine to what extent the racial disparity in survival is due to disparity in presentation characteristics at diagnosis or disparity in subsequent treatment.Design: Black patients with colon cancer were matched with 3 groups of white patients: a "demographic characteristics" match controlling for age, sex, diagnosis year, and Survey, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) site; a "presentation" match controlling for demographic characteristics plus comorbid conditions and tumor characteristics, including stage and grade; and a "treatment" match, including presentation variables plus details of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy.Setting: 16 U.S. SEER sites.Patients: 7677 black patients aged 65 years or older diagnosed between 1991 and 2005 in the SEER-Medicare database and 3 sets of 7677 matched white patients, followed until 31 December 2009.Measurements: 5-year survival.Results: The absolute difference in 5-year survival between black and white patients was 9.9% (95% CI, 8.3% to 11.4%; P < 0.001) in the demographic characteristics match. This disparity remained unchanged between 1991 and 2005. After matching for presentation characteristics, the difference decreased to 4.9% (CI, 3.6% to 6.1%; P < 0.001). After additional matching for treatment, this difference decreased to 4.3% (CI, 2.9% to 5.5%; P < 0.001). The disparity in survival attributed to treatment differences made up only an absolute 0.6% of the overall 9.9% survival disparity.Limitation: An observational study limited to elderly Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries living in selected geographic areas.Conclusion: Racial disparities in colon cancer survival did not decrease among patients diagnosed between 1991 and 2005. This persistent disparity seemed to be more related to presentation characteristics at diagnosis than to subsequent treatment differences.

IMPORTANCE Difference in breast cancer survival by race is a recognized problem among Medicare beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE To determine if racial disparity in breast cancer survival is primarily attributable to differences in presentation characteristics at diagnosis or subsequent treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Comparison of 7375 black women 65 years and older diagnosed between 1991 to 2005 and 3 sets of 7375 matched white control patients selected from 99,898 white potential controls, using data for 16 US Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) sites in the SEER-Medicare database. All patients received follow-up through December 31, 2009, and the black case patients were matched to 3 white control populations on demographics (age, year of diagnosis, and SEER site), presentation (demographics variables plus patient comorbid conditions and tumor characteristics such as stage, size, grade, and estrogen receptor status), and treatment (presentation variables plus details of surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES 5-Year survival. RESULTS The absolute difference in 5-year survival (blacks, 55.9%; whites, 68.8%) was 12.9% (95% CI, 11.5%-14.5%; P < .001) in the demographics match. This difference remained unchanged between 1991 and 2005. After matching on presentation characteristics, the absolute difference in 5-year survival was 4.4% (95% CI, 2.8%-5.8%; P < .001) and was 3.6% (95% CI, 2.3%-4.9%; P < .001) lower for blacks than for whites matched also on treatment. In the presentation match, fewer blacks received treatment (87.4% vs 91.8%; P < .001), time from diagnosis to treatment was longer (29.2 vs 22.8 days; P < .001), use of anthracyclines and taxols was lower (3.7% vs 5.0%; P < .001), and breast-conserving surgery without other treatment was more frequent (8.2% vs 7.3%; P = .04). Nevertheless, differences in survival associated with treatment differences accounted for only 0.81% of the 12.9% survival difference. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In the SEER-Medicare database, differences in breast cancer survival between black and white women did not substantially change among women diagnosed between 1991 and 2005. These differences in survival appear primarily related to presentation characteristics at diagnosis rather than treatment differences.

Objective: To investigate the association between obesity and perioperative acute kidney injury (AKI), controlling for preoperative kidney dysfunction.Background: More than 30% of patients older than 60 years are obese and, therefore, at risk for kidney disease. Postoperative AKI is a significant problem.Methods: We performed a matched case-control study of patients enrolled in the Obesity and Surgical Outcomes Study, using data of Medicare claims enriched with detailed chart review. Each AKI patient was matched with a non-AKI control similar in procedure type, age, sex, race, emergency status, transfer status, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, admission APACHE score, and the risk of death score with fine balance on hospitals.Results: We identified 514 AKI cases and 694 control patients. Of the cases, 180 (35%) followed orthopedic procedures and 334 (65%) followed colon or thoracic surgery. After matching, obese patients undergoing a surgical procedure demonstrated a 65% increase in odds of AKI within 30 days from admission (odds ratio = 1.65, P < 0.005) when compared with the nonobese patients. After adjustment for potential confounders, the odds of postoperative AKI remained elevated in the elderly obese (odds ratio = 1.68, P = 0.01.)Conclusions: Obesity is an independent risk factor for postoperative AKI in patients older than 65 years. Efforts to optimize kidney function preoperatively should be employed in this at-risk population along with keen monitoring and maintenance of intraoperative hemodynamics. When subtle reductions in urine output or a rising creatinine are observed postoperatively, timely clinical investigation is warranted to maximize renal recovery.

6000 Background: Reducing racial disparities in breast cancer survival has been a federal priority since the early 1990’s. We present a new method to assess disparities using sequential multivariate matching. We ask if racial disparities have increased or decreased over time and if so, what were potential reasons for such changes. Methods: We studied all women over 65 years of age in the Medicare fee for service system diagnosed with breast cancer between 1991 and 2005 who were treated in one of 12 SEER sites (the sites in SEER since 1991). There were 5,251 black patients (74% early stage (I-III), 9% late stage (IV) and 17% missing stage) and 72,695 white patients (81% early stage, 5% late stage and 14% missing stage). All black cases represented the focal group for all matches. Using multivariate matching and the propensity score, white controls were matched to blacks in steps: (1) White controls matched to black cases on age and year of diagnosis; (2) Age, year of diagnosis, and stage; (3): Age, year, stage, estrogen receptor status, grade, and 30 comorbidities. We then compare 5-year survival in the Pre and Post-Taxane periods (1991-1998, 1999-2005). Results: When whites were matched to blacks on age and diagnosis year, 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival was 69.2% vs. 56.7%, P < 0.0001. Matching additionally on stage, differences = 64.1% vs. 56.7%, P < 0.0001; Matching further on tumor characteristics and 30 comorbidities, the disparity reduced to 61.6% vs. 56.7%, P < 0.0001. Comparing trends over time, white-black differences in survival matched for age and year were 67.6% vs. 55.2% (P < 0.0001) in the pre-Taxane era (difference = 12.4%) and 71.2% vs. 58.7% (P < 0.0001) in the post Taxane era (difference = 12.5%); age and year matched paired racial differences were not different across eras (P = 0.389). Conclusions: While there may have been some improvements in overall survival, racial disparities in breast cancer survival have not improved, despite important policy initiatives and treatment advances. Adjusting for presentation at diagnosis does reduce differences in survival, but even these differences remain large and significant, suggesting that differences in both presentation and treatment given presentation are contributing to this disparity.