16720, Austin, Pennsylvania Breast Cancer Score Provider Score

The Provider Score for the Breast Cancer Score in 16720, Austin, Pennsylvania is 37 when comparing 34,000 ZIP Codes in the United States.

An estimate of 96.84 percent of the residents in 16720 has some form of health insurance. 50.69 percent of the residents have some type of public health insurance like Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Affairs (VA), or TRICARE. About 67.85 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 16720 have VA health insurance. Also, percent of the residents receive TRICARE.

For the 294 residents under the age of 18, there is an estimate of 0 pediatricians in a 20-mile radius of 16720. An estimate of 0 geriatricians or physicians who focus on the elderly who can serve the 309 residents over the age of 65 years.

In a 20-mile radius, there are 57 health care providers accessible to residents in 16720, Austin, Pennsylvania.

## Breast Cancer Score Analysis: Doctors in ZIP Code 16720 & Primary Care Availability in Austin

This analysis aims to assess the quality of breast cancer care within ZIP code 16720, focusing on the availability and quality of primary care, and compares it to the broader landscape of primary care access in Austin, Texas. The goal is to provide a comprehensive "Breast Cancer Score," evaluating factors critical to early detection, diagnosis, and treatment, ultimately impacting patient outcomes. This score will consider physician-to-patient ratios, standout practices, telemedicine adoption, and the integration of mental health resources.

ZIP code 16720, encompassing the city of Bradford, Pennsylvania, presents a unique challenge. Located in a more rural setting, it may face limitations in healthcare infrastructure compared to a major metropolitan area like Austin. The availability of primary care physicians is the cornerstone of effective breast cancer screening and early detection. A higher physician-to-patient ratio generally indicates better access to care. In 16720, this ratio must be carefully examined. Are there enough primary care physicians to adequately serve the population, especially women over 40, the demographic most at risk? The presence of Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) or other community health clinics in the area is also crucial. These facilities often provide essential services to underserved populations, increasing the likelihood of early detection through mammograms and regular check-ups.

In contrast, Austin, Texas, benefits from a larger and more diverse healthcare ecosystem. Its physician-to-patient ratio is likely more favorable, though this can vary significantly across different parts of the city. The sheer number of physicians in Austin, including specialists, generally translates to better access to care, particularly for those with insurance. However, even in a city like Austin, disparities can exist, with access to care influenced by factors like socioeconomic status, insurance coverage, and geographic location. The analysis must consider these variations within Austin's diverse population.

Standout practices in both locations, if any, deserve specific attention. What practices in 16720, if any, demonstrate exceptional commitment to breast cancer care? Are there any that have implemented innovative screening programs, patient navigation services, or robust follow-up protocols? Similarly, in Austin, identifying practices that excel in patient-centered care, early detection, and comprehensive treatment is vital. These practices might be recognized for their use of cutting-edge technology, their commitment to patient education, or their success in improving patient outcomes.

Telemedicine adoption is a critical factor in the modern healthcare landscape, especially in rural areas like 16720. Telemedicine can bridge geographical barriers, providing access to specialists, second opinions, and ongoing support. Does 16720 have a robust telemedicine infrastructure, allowing patients to consult with oncologists or radiologists remotely? Is it integrated into primary care practices? In Austin, telemedicine is likely more widespread, but its effectiveness needs to be evaluated. Are all segments of the population benefiting from this technology? Are there language barriers or digital literacy issues that limit access?

Mental health resources are an often-overlooked but essential component of breast cancer care. A cancer diagnosis and treatment can significantly impact a patient's mental well-being. The analysis must assess the availability of mental health services in both locations. Are there therapists, counselors, or support groups available to help patients cope with the emotional challenges of their diagnosis and treatment? Does the primary care network in either location integrate mental health services into their care model? Early intervention can significantly improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

The "Breast Cancer Score" for each location should reflect these factors. For 16720, the score might be lower due to potential limitations in physician-to-patient ratios, access to specialists, and the availability of mental health resources. However, the score could be positively influenced by any innovative programs or telemedicine initiatives implemented by local practices. For Austin, the score would likely be higher, reflecting greater access to care, a wider range of specialists, and a more developed healthcare infrastructure. However, the score could be negatively impacted by disparities in access, particularly for underserved populations.

The analysis should also consider the overall quality of care. This includes factors such as the use of evidence-based guidelines, the availability of advanced imaging technologies (mammography, MRI), and the expertise of the medical professionals involved. It's important to assess the patient experience, including wait times, communication with healthcare providers, and the overall satisfaction with the care received.

The final "Breast Cancer Score" should be a composite measure, reflecting the combined impact of all these factors. It's not simply about the number of doctors available but also about the quality of care, the accessibility of services, and the integration of mental health support. This score should be a valuable tool for patients, healthcare providers, and policymakers, providing a clear picture of the strengths and weaknesses of breast cancer care in each location.

To gain a visual understanding of these complex healthcare landscapes, consider exploring the data through interactive maps. CartoChrome Maps can provide powerful visualizations, allowing you to analyze physician density, access to care, and other critical factors.