Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27713799›Full record

ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada

Robotic prostatectomy is associated with increased patient travel and treatment delay.

Matthew J Maurice, Hui Zhu, Simon P Kim, Robert Abouassaly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Does surgical delay for radical prostatectomy affect patient pathological outcome? A retrospective analysis from a Canadian cohort.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2017
    Article
  11. Observational
  12. Robotic prostatectomy and access to care: Canadian vs. U.S. experience.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Matthew J MauriceDepartment of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Hui ZhuDepartment of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States;; Division of Urology, Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Simon P KimUrology Institute, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Robert AbouassalyUrology Institute, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionNew technologies may limit access to treatment. We investigated radical prostatectomy (RP) access over time since robotic introduction and the impact of robotic use on RP access relative to other approaches in the modern era.

methodsUsing the National Cancer Data Base, RPs performed during the eras of early (2004-2005) and late (2010-2011) robotic dissemination were identified. The primary endpoints, patient travel distance and treatment delay, were compared by era, and for 2010-2011, by surgical approach. Analyses included multivariable and multinomial logistic regression.

results138 476 cases were identified, 32% from 2004-2005 and 68% from 2010-2011. In 2010-2011, 74%, 21%, and 4.3% of RPs were robotic, open, and laparoscopic, respectively. Treatment in 2010-2011 and robotic approach were independently associated with increased patient travel distance and longer treatment delay (p<0.001). Men treated robotically had 1.1-1.2 times higher odds of traveling medium-to-long-range distances and 1.2-1.3 higher odds of delays 90 days or greater compared to those treated open (p<0.001). Laparoscopic approach was associated with increased patient travel and treatment delay, but to a lesser extent than the robotic approach (p<0.001). In high-risk patients, treatment delays remained significantly longer for minimally invasive approaches (p<0.001). Other factors associated with the robotic approach included referral from an outside facility, treatment at an academic or high-volume hospital, higher income, and private insurance. Potential limitations include the retrospective observational design and lack of external validation of the primary outcomes.

conclusionsThe robotic approach is associated with increased travel burden and treatment delay, potentially limiting access to surgical care.

Identifiers

PMID27713799
PMCPMC5045347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.