Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Aug 26.
Published in final edited form as: Med Care. 2010 Jan;48(1):45–51. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181bd49ca

Table 4. Correlates of Patient and Practice Management Process Scores.

Characteristics Md physician communication2 Availability of clinical info2 Patient Support2 Practice feedback3 Access to Info tech3,5

Coeff (se) Coeff (se) Coeff (se) OR (95%CI) OR (95%CI)

Specialization
 ≤15% Referent Referent Referent Referent Referent
 15-49% -.04 (.16) .46 (.143) .321 (.110) 2.1 (1.3, 3.3) 1.7 (1.1, 2.7)
 ≥50% .19 (.23) 1.11 (.219) .642 (.166) 4.4 (2.2, 9.0) 1.8 (0.9, 3.5)
F/Wald test, p value .52, .596 13.69, p<.001 8.70, <.001 19.18, p<.001 5.58, p=.061

Cancer program
 None Referent Referent Referent Referent Referent
 ACoS .19 (.166) .02 (.154) -.09 (.119) 0.9 (0.6, 1.7) 1.0 (0.6, 1.6)
 NCI .43 (.183) .11 (.169) -.25 (.131) 1.8 (1.0, 3.1) 1.2 (0.7, 2.2)
F/Wald test, p value 3.0, .041 .22, .806 1.89, .153 6.00, .049 0.94, .626

Teaching program .46 (.140)* 1.61 (.20)* .29 (.10)* 2.0 (1.3, 3.0) 2.1 (1.4, 3.2)
1

all values are adjusted for variables in the table, surgeon gender, and years in practice

2

interval dependent variable range 1.0 to 5.0

3

ordinal count range 0-3

*

p<.001

5

also controls for proportion of newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer seen for second opinion