PURPOSE To investigate the geographic accessibility of non-surgical treatments for liver neoplasms across Brazilian regions, analyzing the correlation between the patient's residential location and hospitalization site. METHODS A retrospective study was conducted following the STROBE checklist, utilizing DATASUS’s Hospital Information System. Data confidentiality and ethical approval were ensured. All percutaneous alcohol injection, radiofrequency ablation, and chemoembolization from all hospitals were searched. Based on the PICO principle: People with liver cancer in Brazil from 2013 to 2023 (Population) analyzing the correlation between the patient's residence location and the patient's place of hospitalization for percutaneous alcohol injection (Cod: 0416040179), radiofrequency ablation (Cod: 0416040187), and chemoembolization (Cod: 0416040195) (Interest) Brazilian region (Context). RESULTS In our analysis of patients undergoing liver neoplasm treatment search a total of 14104 procedures. A descriptive statistical analysis of hospitalization data unveils a noteworthy trend in patient relocation. The North showed the highest relocation rate (91.41%) only 17 inpatients at local hospitals out of a total of 198 with liver cancer. The Midwest region also stood out due to migration, with 237 patients treated at local hospitals out of a total of 467 residents, there were 230 migrations (49,25%). The South region (0.93%, 31 inpatients) smaller migration. The Southeast region, witnessing a substantial influx of 8142 hospitalizations compared to 7767 residents (increase of 4.8% due to patient migration). The Northeast region, where hospitalizations sums up to 2431, accounting for 2364 resident patients (2.83% increase due to migration). CONCLUSION The North region may see high patient mobility for medical care, contrasting with the Southeast. The healthcare gap highlights the need for equity measures and regional integration to enhance liver cancer treatment for all patients, regardless of location.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meneses et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: