4.2 Review

Allogeneic Transplant Physician and Center Capacity in the United States

Journal

BIOLOGY OF BLOOD AND MARROW TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 17, Issue 7, Pages 956-961

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2011.03.008

Keywords

Hematopoietic cell transplantation; National Marrow Donor Program; Center capacity; Physician capacity

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute (NCI) [U24-CA76518, 5U01HL069294]
  2. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) [5U01HL069294]
  3. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Shortage of manpower and center capacity is expected to be a major challenge to the anticipated future growth in the utilization of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in the United States. Using data from the National Marrow Donor Program's Transplant Center Network Renewal Survey, we describe transplant center and transplant physician capacity in the United States from 2005 to 2009. Over this 5-year period, the number of allogeneic transplants increased by 30%, bed capacity increased by 17%, and physician full-time equivalents increased by 26%. The number of related donor HCT increased by 15% and unrelated donor HCT increased by 45%. In addition to large centers, small-and medium-sized centers also made a major contribution to overall national transplant volumes for both related and unrelated donor HCT. Increase in utilization of unrelated donor HCT occurred in centers irrespective of their size. The majority of transplant centers were performing more transplantations using existing physician and bed capacity. Our study provides important descriptions of allogeneic transplant activity and capacity of U.S. centers, and our data will assist policy makers plan for the projected growth in the use of transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 17: 956-961 (2011) (C) 2011 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available