ÌÇÐÄvlog

Object moved to here.

Assessing the Environmental and Downstream Human Health Impacts of Decentralizing Cancer Care | Oncology | JAMA Oncology | ÌÇÐÄvlog

ÌÇÐÄvlog

[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
1 Comment for this article
EXPAND ALL
Assessing the Environmental and Downstream Human Health Impacts of Decentralizing Cancer Care: Insights and Recommendations
Nie Zhang, M.D. | Department of Oncology, Fuyang Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Anhui, 236000, China
To the Editor:
We recently read the article by Hantel A et al.1 published in your esteemed journal with great interest. This study provides important insights into the potential of decentralized cancer care to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the associated human health impacts. We commend the authors for their rigorous approach using life cycle assessment methods and appreciate the nuanced discussion on the potential reductions in GHG emissions. While the study contributes significantly to our understanding, its results need cautious interpretation for several reasons.
First, the study utilizes a “natural experiment†during the COVID-19 pandemic to compare the
environmental impact of decentralized and traditional care. While innovative, this approach has a number of limitations. First, during the pandemic, face-to-face visits decreased dramatically and the use of telemedicine increased dramatically due to containment measures and fear of infection. These changes may not have been driven exclusively by shifts in the model of care, but rather by special circumstances. In addition, during a pandemic, certain non-emergency healthcare services may be delayed or canceled, which can affect overall healthcare demand and delivery patterns, and thus the calculation of emissions2,3. We suggest that future studies should collect and analyze data over a longer time frame, including before, during, and after the pandemic. This will help researchers discern which changes are caused by pandemic-specific circumstances and which are the result of real changes in service patterns.
Second, telemedicine relies on access to and proficiency in technology by both patients and providers. Patients in rural areas, the elderly, the economically disadvantaged and those with limited education may not have access to reliable Internet services or the equipment needed for telemedicine. Therefore, addressing limitations in technology access and proficiency is critical to the successful implementation of decentralized cancer care through telemedicine4.
Finally, telemedicine involves the electronic transmission of large amounts of sensitive health information, making data security and privacy protection important issues. Although these issues were not the primary focus of this study, a discussion of the data security implications of telemedicine in the absence of stringent data protection measures is necessary given the highly sensitive nature of oncology patient information.
In conclusion, the study by Hantel et al. is an important contribution to our understanding of the environmental impacts of healthcare delivery. We look forward to further research that addresses these aspects and continues to refine our strategies for sustainable healthcare practices.
Reference
1. Hantel A, Cernik C, Walsh TP, et al. Assessing the Environmental and Downstream Human Health Impacts of Decentralizing Cancer Care. JAMA Oncol. Published online June 3, 2024. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.2744.
2. Muselli M, Cofini V, Mammarella L, et al. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on emergency services. Ann Ig. 2022;34(3):248-258. doi:10.7416/ai.2021.2480.
3. Xiao H, Dai X, Wagenaar BH, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health services utilization in China: Time-series analyses for 2016-2020. Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2021; 9:100122. Published 2021 Mar 24. doi: 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2021.100122.
4. Hand LJ. The Role of Telemedicine in Rural Mental Health Care Around the Globe. Telemed J E Health. 2022;28(3):285-294. doi:10.1089/tmj.2020.0536.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
READ MORE
Original Investigation
June 3, 2024

Assessing the Environmental and Downstream Human Health Impacts of Decentralizing Cancer Care

Author Affiliations
  • 1Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 2Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 3Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston
JAMA Oncol. 2024;10(9):1245-1252. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.2744
Key Points

QuestionÌý Do reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and associated health harms occur with decentralizing cancer care?

FindingsÌý In this cohort study including 123 890 patients seen over 1.6 million visit days, compared with an in-person–preferred care model, a telemedicine preferred–care model reduced per–visit day emissions by 81.3%. In a national counterfactual model comparing usual vs decentralized care (telemedicine as well as local site care when possible), there was a 33.1% reduction in emissions, which corresponded to an annual emissions reduction of 75.3 million kilograms of CO2 equivalents, or 15.0 to 47.7 disability-adjusted life-years.

MeaningÌý Decentralizing oncology care can meaningfully reduce emissions and modestly reduce human health harms.

Abstract

ImportanceÌý Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from health care are substantial and disproportionately harm persons with cancer. Emissions from a central component of oncology care, outpatient clinician visits, are not well described, nor are the reductions in emissions and human harms that could be obtained through decentralizing this aspect of cancer care (ie, telemedicine and local clinician care when possible).

ObjectiveÌý To assess potential reductions in GHG emissions and downstream health harms associated with telemedicine and fully decentralized cancer care.

Design, Setting, and ParticipantsÌý This population-based cohort study and counterfactual analyses using life cycle assessment methods analyzed persons receiving cancer care at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute between May 2015 and December 2020 as well as persons diagnosed with cancer over the same period from the Cancer in North America (CiNA) public dataset. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to April 2024.

Main Outcomes and MeasuresÌý The adjusted per–visit day difference in GHG emissions in kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents between 2 periods: an in-person care model period (May 2015 to February 2020; preperiod) and a telemedicine period (March to December 2020; postperiod), and the annual decrease in disability-adjusted life-years in a counterfactual model where care during the preperiod was maximally decentralized nationwide.

ResultsÌý Of 123 890 included patients, 73 988 (59.7%) were female, and the median (IQR) age at first diagnosis was 59 (48-68) years. Patients were seen over 1.6 million visit days. In mixed-effects log-linear regression, the mean absolute reduction in per–visit day CO2 equivalent emissions between the preperiod and postperiod was 36.4 kg (95% CI, 36.2-36.6), a reduction of 81.3% (95% CI, 80.8-81.7) compared with the baseline model. In a counterfactual decentralized care model of the preperiod, there was a relative emissions reduction of 33.1% (95% CI, 32.9-33.3). When demographically matched to 10.3 million persons in the CiNA dataset, decentralized care would have reduced national emissions by 75.3 million kg of CO2 equivalents annually; this corresponded to an estimated annual reduction of 15.0 to 47.7 disability-adjusted life-years.

Conclusions and RelevanceÌý This cohort study found that using decentralization through telemedicine and local care may substantially reduce cancer care’s GHG emissions; this corresponds to small reductions in human mortality.

×