Effect of insurance type on perioperative outcomes after robotic-assisted pulmonary lobectomy for lung cancer.

Abstract

BACKGROUND\nInsurance type has been reported to be an independent predictor of overall survival in lung cancer patients. We studied the effect of insurance type on patient outcomes after minimally invasive pulmonary lobectomy for lung cancer.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe retrospectively analyzed 433 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted pulmonary lobectomy by one surgeon during an 80-month period. Perioperative outcomes and intraoperative and postoperative complications were noted. Disposition at discharge after surgery (favorable, eg, transfer to home with self-care or with home health nursing and/or physical therapy, versus unfavorable, eg, long-term acute care or rehabilitation facility, hospice, or death) and 5-year overall survival (5-years OS) were also recorded. We used Pearson χ2, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Kruskal-Wallis test to compare variables and Cox regression for survival analysis.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThere were 107 patients (mean age 57.5 years) with private insurance, 118 (mean age 70.3 years) with public insurance (Medicare or Medicaid), 196 (mean age 71.8 year; P < .001) with combination insurance plans (Medicare plus a privately supplied supplemental), and 12 patients with no insurance (excluded owing to low sample size). There were more current smokers in the public insurance group, more former smokers in the combination insurance group, and more nonsmokers in the private insurance group (P\xa0= .03). There were more comorbidities in the public and combination insurance groups versus the private insurance group, including gastroesophageal reflux disease (P\xa0= .003), hypertension (P\xa0= .01), and hyperlipidemia (P < .001). The groups had no differences in tumor size or pathologic stage. There were higher numbers of intraoperative conversions to open lobectomy in the private and public insurance groups versus the combination insurance group (P\xa0= .001). Also, the private and combination insurance groups had more cases of favorable disposition at discharge after surgery compared with the public insurance group (P < .001). Multivariable regression analyses identified private insurance type as an independent predictor of favorable disposition at discharge (public versus private plan; odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.85, P\xa0= .02) and 5-year OS (combination versus private plan; hazard ratio, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.26-5.67, P\xa0= .01; public versus private plan; HR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.37-5.89; P\xa0= .01).\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nAlthough public or combination insurance type was associated with greater risk of all-cause mortality, and public insurance type was associated with less favorable disposition at discharge after surgery and overall conversion to open lobectomy, insurance type was not associated with increased intraoperative complications, hospital duration of stay, or in-hospital mortality after minimally invasive robotic-assisted pulmonary lobectomy.