Shared decision-making as a cost-containment strategy: US physician reactions from a cross-sectional survey.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To assess US physicians' attitudes towards using shared decision-making (SDM) to achieve cost containment.Design
Cross-sectional mailed survey.Setting
US medical practice.Participants
3897 physicians were randomly selected from the AMA Physician Masterfile. Of these, 2556 completed the survey.Main outcome measures
Level of enthusiasm for "Promoting better conversations with patients as a means of lowering healthcare costs"; degree of agreement with "Decision support tools that show costs would be helpful in my practice" and agreement with "should promoting SDM be legislated to control overall healthcare costs".Results
Of 2556 respondents (response rate (RR) 65%), two-thirds (67%) were 'very enthusiastic' about promoting SDM as a means of reducing healthcare costs. Most (70%) agreed decision support tools that show costs would be helpful in their practice, but only 24% agreed with legislating SDM to control costs. Compared with physicians with billing-only compensation, respondents with salary compensation were more likely to strongly agree that decision support tools showing costs would be helpful (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.7). Primary care physicians (vs surgeons, OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.6) expressed more enthusiasm for SDM being legislated as a means to address healthcare costs.Conclusions
Most US physicians express enthusiasm about using SDM to help contain costs. They believe decision support tools that show costs would be useful. Few agree that SDM should be legislated as a means to control healthcare costs.
SUBMITTER: Tilburt JC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3902508 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Shared decision-making as a cost-containment strategy: US physician reactions from a cross-sectional survey.
Tilburt Jon C JC Wynia Matthew K MK Montori Victor M VM Thorsteinsdottir Bjorg B Egginton Jason S JS Sheeler Robert D RD Liebow Mark M Humeniuk Katherine M KM Goold Susan Dorr SD
BMJ open 20140114 1
<h4>Objective</h4>To assess US physicians' attitudes towards using shared decision-making (SDM) to achieve cost containment.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-sectional mailed survey.<h4>Setting</h4>US medical practice.<h4>Participants</h4>3897 physicians were randomly selected from the AMA Physician Masterfile. Of these, 2556 completed the survey.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Level of enthusiasm for "Promoting better conversations with patients as a means of lowering healthcare costs"; degree of agreement wi ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Due to a low birth rate and an aging population, Japan faces an increase in the number of elderly people without children living in single households. These elderly without a spouse and/or children encounter a lack of caregivers because most sources of care for the elderly in Japan are not provided by private agencies but by family members. However, family caregivers not only help with daily living but are also key participants in treatment decision making. The effect of family absence on treatment decision making has not been elucidated, although more elderly people will not have family members to make surrogate decisions on their behalf. OBJECTIVE:The aim is to understand the influence of family absence on treatment decision making by physicians through a cross-sectional online survey with three hypothetical vignettes of patients. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional online survey among Japanese physicians using three hypothetical vignettes. The first vignette was about a 65-year-old man with alcoholic liver cirrhosis and the second was about a 78-year-old woman with dementia, both of whom developed pneumonia with consciousness disturbance. The third vignette was about a 70-year-old woman with necrosis of her lower limb. Participants were randomly assigned to either of the two versions of the questionnaires-with family or without family-but methods were identical otherwise. Participants chose yes or no responses to questions about whether they would perform the presented medical procedures. RESULTS:Among 1112 physicians, 454 (40.8%) completed the survey; there were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between groups. Significantly fewer physicians had a willingness to perform dialysis (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.80; P=.002) and artificial ventilation (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.75; P<.001) for a patient from vignette 1 without family. In vignette 2, fewer physicians were willing to perform artificial ventilation (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90; P=.02). In vignette 3, significantly fewer physicians showed willingness to perform wound treatment (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31-0.84; P=.007), surgery (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.22-0.57; P<.001), blood transfusion (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31-0.66; P<.001), vasopressor (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.72; P<.001), dialysis (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.59; P<.001), artificial ventilation (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15-0.40; P<.001), and chest compression (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.18-0.47; P<.001) for a patient without family. CONCLUSIONS:Elderly patients may have treatments withheld because of the absence of family, highlighting the potential importance of advance care planning in the era of an aging society with a declining birth rate.
| S-EPMC6764328 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWhile shared decision making (SDM) promotes health-related decisions that are informed, value-based and adhered to, few studies report on theory-based approaches to SDM adoption by healthcare professionals. We aimed to identify the factors influencing dietitians' intentions to adopt two SDM behaviours: 1) present dietary treatment options to patients and 2) help patients clarify their values and preferences.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional postal survey based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour among 428 randomly selected dietitians working in clinical practice across the Province of Quebec, Canada. We performed descriptive analyses and multiple regression analyses to determine the variables that explained the variance in intention to perform the behaviours.ResultsA total of 203 dietitians completed the questionnaire. Their ages were from 23 to 66 and they had been practising dietetics for 15.4±11.1 years (mean ± SD). On a scale from 1 to 7 (from strongly disagree to strongly agree), dietitians' intentions to present dietary treatment options and to clarify their patients' values and preferences were 5.00±1.14 and 5.68±0.74, respectively. Perceived behavioural control (??=?0.56, ?<0.0001), subjective norm (??=?0.16, ?<0.05), and moral norm (??=?0.22, ?<0.0001), were the factors significantly predicting the intention to present dietary treatment options, while perceived behavioural control (??=?0.60, ?<0.0001), attitude (??=?0.20, ?<0.05), and professional norm (??=?0.22, ?<0.001), significantly predicted the intention to help patients' clarify their values and preferences.ConclusionOur results showed that dietitians intend to adopt the two SDM behaviours studied. Factors influencing intention were different for each behaviour, except for perceived behavioural control which was common to both behaviours. Thus, perceived behavioural control could be a key factor in interventions aiming to encourage implementation of SDM by dietitians.
| S-EPMC3659101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Choosing between deep brain stimulation (DBS), Levodopa-Carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), or continuous subcutaneous Apomorphine infusion (CSAI) in advanced Parkinson's disease is a complex decision. It is paramount to combine evidence with the professional's expertise and the patient's preferences. The patient's preferences can be elicited and integrated into the treatment choice through shared decision-making (SDM). Objective: In this cross-sectional survey study we explored patient's involvement in decision-making and identified facilitators and barriers for shared decision-making (SDM) in advanced Parkinson from the patient's perspective. Methods: We invited 180 Dutch persons with Parkinson who started DBS, LCIG, or CSAI in the previous 3 years to complete a questionnaire. Questions covered three topics; (1) preferred and experienced roles in the decision process for an advanced treatment, (2) information needs to make a decision and actually received information, and (3) factors that had positively or negatively influenced shared decision-making (SDM). Results: One hundred and twenty one participants completed the questionnaire. The large majority preferred to be involved in the decision-making (93%), and most respondents had experienced an active role (85%). In about half of the respondents (47%), their preferred role did not match their experienced role; 28% had a more active role than they would have preferred. Although 77% perceived to be fully informed at the time of decision, only 41% stated they knew all three therapeutic options. Participants identified the most important facilitators for shared decision-making (SDM) at the patient's level (i.e., perceiving the decision to be his own choice), at the neurologist's level (i.e., having expertise on all treatment options, and taking time for the decision), and within the professional-patient relationship (i.e., trust and having an open discussion). The main barriers for shared decision-making (SDM) existed at the patient's level (i.e., perceiving there is no choice), neurologist's level (own treatment preference), and organizational level (i.e., no research available that compares treatments, multiple professionals involved, and lack of consultation time). Conclusions: Patients want to be involved and feel involved when choosing an advanced treatment, but often do not know all treatment options. Implementation of true patient involvement needs personalized information provision on all treatment options and improvement on how this information is communicated.
| S-EPMC6706819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHormone therapy is one option for some types of prostate cancer. Shared decision making (SDM) is important in the decision making process, but SDM between prostate cancer patients receiving hormone therapy and physicians is not fully understood. This study tested hypotheses: "Patients' perception of SDM is associated with treatment satisfaction, mediated by satisfaction with physicians' explanations and perceived effective decision making" and "The amount of information provided to patients by physicians on diseases and treatment is associated with treatment satisfaction mediated by patients' perceived SDM and satisfaction with physicians' explanations."MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted using an online panel via a private research company in Japan. The participants in this study were patients registered with the panel who had received or were currently receiving hormone therapy for prostate cancer and physicians registered with the panel who were treating patients with prostate cancer. Measures used in this study included a nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire, levels of satisfaction with physicians' explanations and treatment satisfaction, and effective decision making for patients (feeling the choice is informed, value-based, likely to be implemented and expressing satisfaction with the choice), and a Shared Decision Making Questionnaire for Doctors. The hypotheses were examined using path analysis.ResultsIn total, 124 patients and 150 physicians were included in the analyses. In keeping with our hypotheses, perceived SDM significantly correlated with the physicians' explanations and perceived effective decision making for patients, and satisfaction with physicians' explanations and perceived effective decision making for patients were both related to treatment satisfaction. Although the amount of information provided to patients was correlated with the perceived SDM, it was indirectly related to their satisfaction with physicians' explanations.ConclusionsWhen physicians encourage patients to be actively involved in making decisions about treatment through the SDM process while presenting a wide range of information at the start of hormone therapy, patients' effective decision making and physicians' explanations may be improved; consequently, the patients' overall treatment satisfaction may be improved. Physicians who treat patients with prostate cancer may have underestimated the importance of SDM before starting hormone therapy, even greater extent than patients.
| S-EPMC7734751 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction. We aimed to conduct a multinational cross-sectional online survey of medical students' attitudes toward, knowledge of, and experience with shared decision making (SDM). Methods. We conducted the survey from September 2016 until May 2017 using the following: 1) a convenience sample of students from four medical schools each in Canada, the United States, and the Netherlands (n = 12), and 2) all medical schools in the United Kingdom through the British Medical School Council (n = 32). We also distributed the survey through social media. Results. A total of 765 students read the information sheet and 619 completed the survey. Average age was 24, 69% were female. Mean SDM knowledge score was 83.6% (range = 18.8% to 100%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 82.8% to 84.5%). US students had the highest knowledge scores (86.2%, 95% CI = 84.8% to 87.6%). The mean risk communication score was 57.4% (range = 0% to 100%; 95% CI = 57.4% to 60.1%). Knowledge did not vary with age, race, gender, school, or school year. Attitudes were positive, except 46% believed SDM could only be done with higher educated patients, and 80.9% disagreed that physician payment should be linked to SDM performance (increased with years in training, P < 0.05). Attitudes did not vary due to any tested variable. Students indicated they were more likely than experienced clinicians to practice SDM (72.1% v. 48.8%). A total of 74.7% reported prior SDM training and 82.8% were interested in learning more about SDM. Discussion. SDM knowledge is high among medical students in all four countries. Risk communication is less well understood. Attitudes indicate that further research is needed to understand how medical schools deliver and integrate SDM training into existing curricula.
| S-EPMC6843737 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Professional guidelines have identified key communication skills for shared decision-making for critically ill patients, but it is unclear how intensivists interpret and implement them. Objective:To compare the self-evaluations of intensivists reviewing transcripts of their own simulated intensive care unit family meetings with the evaluations of trained expert colleagues. Design, Setting, and Participants:A posttrial web-based survey of intensivists was conducted between January and March 2019. Intensivists reviewed transcripts of simulated intensive care unit family meetings in which they participated in a previous trial from October 2016 to November 2017. In the follow-up survey, participants identified if and how they performed key elements of shared decision-making for an intensive care unit patient at high risk of death. Transcript texts that intensivists self-identified as examples of key communication skills recommended by their professional society's policy on shared decision-making were categorized. Main Outcomes and Measures:Comparison of the evaluations of 2 blinded nonparticipant intensivist colleagues with the self-reported responses of the intensivists. Results:Of 116 eligible intensivists, 76 (66%) completed the follow-up survey (mean [SD] respondent age was 43.1 [8.1] years; 72% were male). Sixty-one of 76 intensivists reported conveying prognosis; however, blinded colleagues who reviewed the deidentified transcripts were less likely to report that prognosis had been conveyed than intensivists reviewing their own transcripts (42 of 61; odds ratio, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01-0.44; P < .001). When reviewing their own transcript, intensivists reported presenting many choices, with the most common choice being code status. They also provided a variety of recommendations, with the most common being to continue the current treatment plan. Thirty-three participants (43%) reported that they offered care focused on comfort, but blinded colleagues rated only 1 (4%) as explaining this option in a clear manner. Conclusions and Relevance:In this study, guidelines for shared decision-making and end of life care were interpreted by intensivists in disparate ways. In the absence of training or personalized feedback, self-assessment of communication skills may not be interpreted consistently.
| S-EPMC7237960 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:In this study, we aim to compare shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge and attitudes between US-based physician assistants (PAs), nurse practitioners (NPs) and physicians across surgical and family medicine specialties. SETTING:We administered a cross-sectional, web-based survey between 20 September 2017 and 1 November 2017. PARTICIPANTS:272 US-based NPs, PA and physicians completed the survey. 250 physicians were sent a generic email invitation to participate, of whom 100 completed the survey. 3300 NPs and PAs were invited, among whom 172 completed the survey. Individuals who met the following exclusion criteria were excluded from participation: (1) lack of English proficiency; (2) area of practice other than family medicine or surgery; (3) licensure other than physician, PA or NP; (4) practicing in a country other than the US. RESULTS:We found few substantial differences in SDM knowledge and attitudes across clinician types, revealing positive attitudes across the sample paired with low to moderate knowledge. Family medicine professionals (PAs) were most knowledgeable on several items. Very few respondents (3%; 95%?CI 1.5% to 6.2%) favoured a paternalistic approach to decision-making. CONCLUSIONS:Recent policy-level promotion of SDM may have influenced positive clinician attitudes towards SDM. Positive attitudes despite limited knowledge warrant SDM training across occupations and specialties, while encouraging all clinicians to promote SDM. Given positive attitudes and similar knowledge across clinician types, we recommend that SDM is not confined to the patient-physician dyad but instead advocated among other health professionals.
| S-EPMC6196864 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundShared decision making (SDM) is a health communication model that evolved in Europe and North America and largely reflects the values and medical practices dominant in these areas.ObjectiveThis study aims to understand the beliefs, perceptions, and practices related to SDM and patient-centered care (PCC) of physicians in Israel, Jordan, and the United States.MethodsA hypothesis-generating comparative survey study was administered to physicians from Israel, Jordan, and the United States.ResultsA total of 36 surveys were collected via snowball sampling (Jordan: n=15; United States: n=12; Israel: n=9). SDM was perceived as a way to inform patients and allow them to participate in their care. Barriers to implementing SDM varied based on place of origin; physicians in the United States mentioned limited time, physicians in Jordan reported that a lack of patient education limits SDM practices, and physicians in Israel reported lack of communication training. Most US physicians defined PCC as a practice for prioritizing patient preferences, whereas both Jordanian and Israeli physicians defined PCC as a holistic approach to care and to prioritizing patient needs. Barriers to implementing PCC, as seen by US physicians, were mostly centered on limited appointment time and insurance coverage. In Jordan and Israel, staff shortage and a lack of resources in the system were seen as major barriers to PCC implementation.ConclusionsThe study adds to the limited, yet important, literature on SDM and PCC in areas of the world outside the United States, Canada, Australia, and Western Europe. The study suggests that perceptions of PCC might widely differ among these regions, whereas concepts of SDM might be shared. Future work should clarify these differences.
| S-EPMC7432149 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDiscussions of medication costs between patients and clinicians are infrequent and often suboptimal. In the context of recently introduced drugs that are effective but expensive, patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction provide an ideal population to understand the perspectives of patients with chronic illness on medication cost and cost discussions.MethodsTo explore patients' perspectives on discussing out-of-pocket medication costs with clinicians, 49 adults, aged 44 to 70 years, with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were recruited from outpatient heart failure clinics. Descriptive qualitative analysis was performed on open-ended text data.ResultsParticipants who had prior medication-related cost discussions described their experience as generally positive, but about half of the participants had never had a cost discussion with their clinician. Most participants were open to cost discussions with clinicians and preferred that the clinician initiate discussions regarding medication cost. Importantly, these preferences held constant across reported levels of financial burden.ConclusionsThese data suggest a substantial willingness on the part of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction to incorporate cost discussions into their care and identify important aspects of these discussions for clinicians to consider when engaging in conversations where cost is relevant. Improving understanding about how to integrate patient preferences regarding cost discussions into clinical encounters is an important priority for advancing patient-centered care.
| S-EPMC7982995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe assessed inpatient perceived shared decision making (SDM) and tested the association of SDM with inpatient satisfaction in public tertiary hospitals in Shanghai, China.MethodsA cross-sectional survey of 2585 inpatients in 47 public tertiary hospitals in Shanghai in July and August 2018 was conducted. We assessed overall SDM and 4 aspects of SDM and tested the factors influencing SDM and the association of SDM with patient satisfaction (patient satisfaction with physician services, medical expenses, outcomes and overall inpatient care), by adopting linear or two-level regression models.ResultsThe positive response rate (PRR) and high positive response rate (HPRR) to overall SDM among the inpatients of public tertiary hospitals in Shanghai were relatively high (95.30% and 87.86%, respectively), while the HPRR to "My physician informed me of different treatment alternatives" was relatively low (80.09%). In addition, the inpatients who underwent surgery during admission had higher HPRRs and adjusted HPRRs to overall SDM than those who did not undergo surgery. The study showed that the adjusted high satisfaction rates (HSRs) with physician services, medical expenses, outcomes and overall inpatient care among the inpatients with high level of overall SDM were higher (96.50%, 68.44%, 89.50% and 92.60%) than those among the inpatients without a high level of overall SDM (71.77%, 35.19%, 57.30% and 67.49%). The greatest differences in the adjusted HSRs between the inpatients with and without a high level of SDM were found in inpatient satisfaction with medical expenses and informed consent in SDM. Moreover, 46.22% of the variances in the HSRs with overall inpatient care across the hospitals were attributed to the hospital type (general hospitals vs. specialty hospitals).ConclusionsInpatient PRRs and HPRRs to SDM in public tertiary hospitals in Shanghai are relatively high overall but lower to information regarding alternatives. SDM can be affected by the SDM preference of both the patients and physicians and medical condition. Patient satisfaction can be improved through better SDM and should be committed at the hospital level.
| S-EPMC7831242 | biostudies-literature