Using Linked Lung Cancer Registry and Hospital Data for Guiding Health Service Improvement

Main Article Content

David Roder
Hui You
Deborah Baker
Richard Walton
Brian McCaughan
Sanchia Sranda
David Currow

Abstract

Objective: To use linked NSW Cancer Registry and hospital lung cancer (LC) data for raising discussion points on how to improve outcomes.


Design: Historical cohort – cases diagnosed in 2003-2007.


Setting: New South Wales, Australia


Outcome Measures: Relative odds (OR) of localised disease and resection of non-small cases (NSCLC) using multiple logistic regression. Comparisons of risk of NSCLC death using competing risk regression.


Findings: (1) Older patients have fewer resections of localised NSCLC [adjusted OR 95% CLs; 80+Vs <60 years; 0.20 (0.14, 0.28)]. Cases with co-morbidity have fewer resections [adjusted OR, 0.74 (0.61, 0.90)] and have more conservative resections. Question: Is there the best balance between resection and avoiding surgery to accommodate frailty and co-morbidity? (2) Compared with public patients, the health insured: have higher odds of localised LC [adjusted OR, 1.23 (1.12, 1.35] and resection for localised NSCLC [adjusted OR, 2.08 (1.70, 2.54)]; are more likely to have lobectomies than wedge/segmental resections (p<0.001); and have a lower risk of LC death [adjusted SHR, 0.89 (0.85, 0.93)]. Question: Are there opportunities for improving publicpatient outcomes? (3) Patients born in non-English speaking countries have lower odds of localised disease [adjusted OR, 0.88 (0.79, 0.99)]. – Question: Could this difference be decreased by reducing cultural and language barriers? (4) Cancers of pulmonary lobes rather than the main bronchus pose lower risks of LC death. Question: Could outcomes for main bronchus cancers be improved by up-skilling or referral to higher-volume centres? (5) Greater extent of disease is strongly predictive of case fatality – Question: Could LC deaths be reduced by earlier treatment? (6) Use of lobectomies varies – Question: Could survival be increased through greater use of lobectomies for localised NSCLC?


Conclusions: Linked cancer registry and hospital data can increase system-wide understanding of local health-service delivery and prompt discussion points on how to improve outcomes.


Abbreviations: APDC – Australian Patient Data Collection; CHeReL – Centre for Health Record Linkage; EOD – Extent of Disease; LC – Lung Cancer; NSCLC – Non-Small Cell Cancers; NSWCR – New South Wales Cancer Registry; OR – Relative Odds; SEIFA – Socio-Economic Index for Areas; SES – Socio- Economic Status.

Article Details

How to Cite
Roder, D., You, H., Baker, D., Walton, R., McCaughan, B., Sranda, S., & Currow, D. (2016). Using Linked Lung Cancer Registry and Hospital Data for Guiding Health Service Improvement. Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management, 11(1), 65-75. https://doi.org/10.24083/apjhm.v11i1.247
Section
Research Articles
Author Biographies

David Roder, Cancer Institute NSW

Cancer Information and Analysis Unit, Cancer Institute NSW
Alexandria, New South Wales, Australia.

Centre for Population Health Research, University of South Australia
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Hui You, Cancer Institute NSW

Cancer Information and Analysis Unit, Cancer Institute NSW
Alexandria, New South Wales, Australia.

Deborah Baker, Cancer Institute NSW

Cancer Information and Analysis Unit, Cancer Institute NSW
Alexandria, New South Wales, Australia.

Richard Walton, Cancer Institute NSW

Cancer Analysis and Statistics Unit, Cancer Institute NSW
Alexandria, New South Wales, Australia.

Brian McCaughan, University of Sydnedy

Faculty of Medicine, University of Sydney
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Sanchia Sranda, Cancer Institute NSW

School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

David Currow, Cancer Institute NSW

Chief Executive Officer, Cancer Institute NSW
Alexandria, New South Wales, Australia.