20245, Washington, District of Columbia Breast Cancer Score Provider Score

The Provider Score for the Breast Cancer Score in 20245, Washington, District of Columbia is 100 when comparing 34,000 ZIP Codes in the United States.

An estimate of 0.00 percent of the residents in 20245 has some form of health insurance. 0.00 percent of the residents have some type of public health insurance like Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Affairs (VA), or TRICARE. About 0.00 percent of the residents have private health insurance, either through their employer or direct purchase. Military veterans should know that percent of the residents in the ZIP Code of 20245 have VA health insurance. Also, percent of the residents receive TRICARE.

For the 0 residents under the age of 18, there is an estimate of 3 pediatricians in a 20-mile radius of 20245. An estimate of 1 geriatricians or physicians who focus on the elderly who can serve the 0 residents over the age of 65 years.

In a 20-mile radius, there are 434 health care providers accessible to residents in 20245, Washington, District of Columbia.

The analysis focuses on breast cancer care within ZIP code 20245, which, for the purposes of this exercise, is assumed to be a representative area within Washington, D.C., and examines primary care availability across the city. The goal is to provide a "Breast Cancer Score" assessment, considering factors like physician density, practice quality, telemedicine integration, and mental health support. This is not a real-world ranking, but a hypothetical model for illustrative purposes.

Breast cancer care necessitates a multidisciplinary approach. The foundation of this care rests on accessible and high-quality primary care. In ZIP code 20245, the initial assessment would involve evaluating the physician-to-patient ratio. A low ratio, indicating a higher concentration of physicians relative to the population, is a positive indicator. Data from sources like the American Medical Association (AMA) and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) would be crucial. The analysis would delve into the types of primary care physicians available – internal medicine, family medicine, and general practitioners – and their acceptance of new patients.

Primary care practices would be assessed based on their adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines. This includes the frequency of mammograms, the use of digital mammography, and the availability of advanced imaging techniques like 3D mammography (tomosynthesis). Practices with certified breast imaging centers on-site or nearby would score higher. The analysis would also consider the presence of patient navigators, who assist patients through the complex process of diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up care.

Telemedicine has become increasingly important in healthcare delivery. The "Breast Cancer Score" would evaluate the adoption of telemedicine by primary care practices in 20245. Practices offering virtual consultations for initial assessments, follow-up appointments, and medication management would receive higher scores. The ease of use of the telemedicine platform, the availability of technical support for patients, and the integration of telemedicine with the practice's electronic health record (EHR) system would be considered.

Mental health support is an integral part of breast cancer care. The analysis would examine the availability of mental health resources within the primary care practices and the broader community. Practices with on-site therapists or partnerships with mental health providers would score higher. The availability of support groups, both in-person and virtual, would also be considered. The analysis would also look at whether practices screen patients for depression and anxiety, and the protocols for referring patients to mental health services.

Beyond primary care, the analysis would consider the availability of specialists in the vicinity of 20245. This includes oncologists, surgeons, radiologists, and radiation oncologists. The proximity of these specialists, the ease of scheduling appointments, and the reputation of their practices would be assessed. The presence of multidisciplinary cancer centers, where specialists collaborate to provide comprehensive care, would be a significant positive factor.

The quality of care provided by these specialists would be evaluated. This includes the use of evidence-based treatment protocols, the availability of clinical trials, and the patient outcomes. Data from sources like the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Commission on Cancer (CoC) would be used to assess the quality of care. Patient satisfaction surveys and online reviews would also be considered.

To assess primary care availability across Washington, D.C., a city-wide analysis would be necessary. This would involve mapping the distribution of primary care physicians, identifying areas with physician shortages, and evaluating the accessibility of care for different populations. Factors like transportation, insurance coverage, and language barriers would be considered.

The analysis would identify standout primary care practices in Washington, D.C. These practices would be recognized for their commitment to patient-centered care, their use of technology, and their positive patient outcomes. The criteria for selecting standout practices would include: high patient satisfaction scores, a strong emphasis on preventive care, the use of electronic health records (EHRs) to improve care coordination, and the adoption of telemedicine to enhance access to care.

The "Breast Cancer Score" would incorporate all of these factors. A higher score would indicate better access to high-quality breast cancer care, including readily available primary care, specialist expertise, telemedicine integration, and robust mental health support. A lower score would indicate areas where improvements are needed.

For 20245, the final score would be a composite of all the factors. For example, a high physician-to-patient ratio, excellent primary care practices, widespread telemedicine adoption, and ample mental health resources would contribute to a high score. Conversely, a low physician-to-patient ratio, limited access to specialists, poor telemedicine adoption, and a lack of mental health support would result in a lower score.

The assessment would not only provide a snapshot of the current state of breast cancer care but also identify areas for improvement. This information could be used by healthcare providers, policymakers, and patients to improve access to care and enhance patient outcomes.

This hypothetical "Breast Cancer Score" analysis underscores the importance of data-driven decision-making in healthcare. By analyzing various factors, we can gain a comprehensive understanding of the quality and accessibility of care in a specific geographic area. This information can be used to identify strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement, ultimately leading to better outcomes for patients.

The data required for this type of analysis is complex and often geographically specific. To visualize this data and gain a deeper understanding of the landscape of breast cancer care in Washington, D.C., and to identify areas with the highest need for resources, consider using CartoChrome maps.