The effect of medication cost transparency alerts on prescriber behavior

Price transparency in Iranian healthcare market

Insufficient price transparency has emerged as a pivotal contributor to patient dissatisfaction, escalating costs, and diminished productivity within Iran's health system. This study aims to delineate and elucidate a definition of price transparency, identify suitable strategies, and present the outcomes associated with establishing a health system that embraces transparent pricing while also addressing the challenges ahead. Employing a quantitative-qualitative research design, data were extracted from a semi-structured interviews with stakeholders. A purposive sampling method, encompassing sequential and snowball techniques, was employed to capture the perspectives of all stakeholders involved in the issue of price transparency in Iran. The interview data were analyzed using the grounded theory approach was classified into three categories: price transparency before, during, and after the receipt of healthcare services. Our findings reveal the causes of low price transparency, strategies to address the issue, and the consequences associated with increased levels of transparency. Ultimately, we contend that health systems can significantly enhance efficiency, patient satisfaction, and the performance of health insurance by adopting transparent pricing for health services, thus obviating the need for resource-intensive restructuring efforts.

Drug pricing and transparency in Europe and the United States: what is it and how does it work?

INTRODUCTION

As drug prices are viewed to be opaque, there have been increasing societal demands on policy and decision makers to implement initiatives that promote drug price transparency.

AREAS COVERED

This Perspective discusses what drug price transparency is and how it works in theory and in practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Transparency on drug prices may target payers, patients and health care professionals; and may relate to prices at each stage in a drug's distribution system. Although proponents claim that drug price transparency will reduce prices and increase patient access, others expect the opposite effect. Nevertheless, a number of international organizations, countries and consumer groups have taken steps to enhance drug price transparency. This has occurred despite a lack of theoretical clarity and of evidence about its likely impact. Policy and decision makers need to consider how payers and pharmaceutical companies are likely to react to drug price transparency and need to be aware that transparency may produce different effects depending on the country to which it is applied. Even though we believe that full drug price transparency is elusive, various incremental measures can be taken to move toward it.

The role of human capital and stress for cost awareness in the healthcare system: a survey among German hospital physicians

BACKGROUND

Germany has the highest per capita health care spending among EU member states, but its hospitals face pressure to generate profits independently due to the government's withdrawal of investment cost coverage. The diagnosis related groups (DRG) payment system was implemented to address the cost issue, challenging hospital physicians to provide services within predefined prices and an economic target corridor to reduce costs. This study examines the extent of cost awareness among medical personnel in German hospitals and its influencing factors.

METHODS

We developed an online survey in which participants across all specialties in hospitals estimated the prices in euros of four common interventions and answered questions about their human capital and perceived stress on the workplace. As a measure of cost awareness, we used the probability of estimating the prices correctly within a reasonable margin. We employed logit logistic regression estimators to identify influencing factors in a sample of 86 participants.

RESULTS

The results revealed that most of the respondents were unaware of the costs of common interventions. General human capital, acquired through prior education, and job-specific human capital had no influence on cost awareness, whereas domain-specific human capital, that is, gaining economic knowledge based on self-interest, had a positive nonlinear effect on cost awareness. Furthermore, an increased stress level negatively influenced cost awareness.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper is the first of its kind for the German health care sector that contributes responses to the question whether health care professionals in German hospitals have cost awareness and if not, what reasons lie behind this lack of knowledge. Our findings show that the cost awareness desired by the introduction of the DRG system has yet to be achieved by medical personnel.

Associations between the use of a real-time benefit tool and measures related to prescription obtainment found in order type subgroups

BACKGROUND

The use of real-time benefit tool (RTBT) may help increase transparency of patients' out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, thereby reducing patients' OOP spend and increasing prescription obtainment.

OBJECTIVE

We have previously reported on the potential benefit of RTBT in electronic health records at a large health system. We explore the benefit of RTBT by subgroups of prescriptions (i.e., order types).

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort, we reviewed orders generated with and without RTBT use. We compared the 2 groups on key metrics related to prescription obtainment (fill rate, modification rate, cancellation rate, time to ready, time to sold, abandonment rate, and cancellation and transfer rate). Subgroup analysis included orders without over-the-counter (OTC) medications, orders without specialty medications, and orders without OTC and specialty medications.

RESULTS

Fill rate, cancellation rate, time to ready, time to sold, abandonment rate, and cancellation and transfer rate were statistically significantly different between the RTBT and non-RTBT groups, favoring the RTBT group (all, P < 0.01). Differences in modification rates were not statistically significant between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

RTBTs have the potential to increase prescription obtainment. A consistent difference in key outcome measures between the RTBT and the non-RTBT groups was apparent among prescription orders regardless of whether OTC and specialty medications were included in the analysis.

Where Do Real-Time Prescription Benefit Tools Fit in the Landscape of High US Prescription Medication Costs? A Narrative Review

The problem of unaffordable prescription medications in the United States is complex and can result in poor patient adherence to therapy, worse clinical outcomes, and high costs to the healthcare system. While providers are aware of the financial burden of healthcare for patients, there is a lack of actionable price transparency at the point of prescribing. Real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) tools are new electronic clinical decision support tools that retrieve patient- and medication-specific out-of-pocket cost information and display it to clinicians at the point of prescribing. The rise in US healthcare costs has been a major driver for efforts to increase medication price transparency, and mandates from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for Medicare Part D sponsors to adopt RTPB tools may spur integration of such tools into electronic health records. Although multiple factors affect the implementation of RTPB tools, there is limited evidence on outcomes. Further research will be needed to understand the impact of RTPB tools on end results such as prescribing behavior, out-of-pocket medication costs for patients, and adherence to pharmacologic treatment. We review the terminology and concepts essential in understanding the landscape of RTPB tools, implementation considerations, barriers to adoption, and directions for future research that will be important to patients, prescribers, health systems, and insurers.

Formulary & benefit and real-time pharmacy Benefit: Electronic standards delivering value to prescribers and pharmacists

The use of standard transactions in the electronic sharing of prescription-related information among payers, prescribers and pharmacists aids in the delivery of effective, safe, and affordable medication therapy to patients. Integral to electronic medication management (eMM) in this environment is the availability of data to aid in the determination of the most appropriate medication for a patient considering benefits coverage restrictions, therapeutic effectiveness, and cost. Key elements of this formulary decision support are the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs Formulary & Benefit (F&B) standard and the related Real-time Pharmacy Benefit (RTPB) standard. In this article, we review the foundational role of F&B in the electronic prescribing of medications, the value it delivers to prescribers, and dispensing pharmacists. The combination of F&B and RTPB to enhance the quality of information available in eMM is also discussed with evidence presented on how these standards help to minimize manual tasks and rework in the pharmacy, optimize time to therapy, lower patient out-of-pocket costs, and result in the dispensing of prescriptions less likely to be abandoned. We conclude with a view of the future of F&B to support new eMM requirements.

"Worth it if you could afford it": Patient perspectives on integrating real-time benefit tools into drug cost conversations

BACKGROUND

Medication costs can lead to financial burdens for patients, creating barriers to effective medication use. Health care provider use of real-time benefit tools (RTBTs) may facilitate cost conversations with patients. We sought to explicate patient views on how RTBTs could be used to improve cost considerations in prescribing decisions.

METHODS

We conducted focus groups to characterize patient perspectives on holding cost conversations with their physicians and to identify factors that would influence the value of RTBTs. We focused on adults aged 50+ who reported trouble paying for their prescriptions. Three groups included patients with conditions requiring high-cost treatments and one group included lower-income patients independent of their medical conditions. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed, coded, and categorized to salient themes employing inductive and deductive approaches using the Health Equity Implementation Framework.

RESULTS

Focus groups were conducted from 09/2020-12/2020 including 18 participants representing cancer (n = 6), diabetes (n = 6), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 3), and lower income (n = 3). Participants were between 50-74, eight self-identified as Black, 10 as White, and eight reported earning <$50,000/year. We identified five themes regarding cost conversations (medication cost importance, past experiences with cost/cost conversations, perception of physician's role and knowledge, knowledge of existing resources, and influence on decision-making) and four RTBT-use-specific themes (advantages/disadvantages, perceived relevance, data quality concerns, and implementation considerations).

CONCLUSION

Approaches that envision RTBTs as one-size-fits-all technological interventions may underestimate the complexity of incorporating price information into prescribing decisions. Nevertheless, patients highlighted the potential value of accurate, real-time information on medication costs to inform decision-making.

National cross-sectional study on cost consciousness, cost accuracy, and national medical waste reduction initiative knowledge among pediatric hospitalists in the United States

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Despite initiatives to reduce waste and spending, there is a gap in physician knowledge regarding the cost of commonly ordered items. We examined the relationship between pediatric hospitalists' knowledge of national medical waste reduction initiatives, self-reported level of cost-consciousness (the degree in which cost affects practice), and cost accuracy (how close an estimate is to its hospital cost) at a national level.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used a national, online survey sent to hospitalists at 49 children's hospitals to assess their knowledge of national medical waste reduction initiatives, self-reported cost consciousness, and cost estimates for commonly ordered laboratory studies, medications, and imaging studies. Actual unit costs for each hospital were obtained from the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS). Cost accuracy was calculated as the percent difference between each respondent's estimate and unit costs, using cost-charge ratios (CCR).

RESULTS

The hospitalist response rate was 17.7% (327/1850), representing 40 hospitals. Overall, 33.1% of respondents had no knowledge of national medical waste reduction initiatives and 24.3% had no knowledge of local hospital costs. There was no significant relationship between cost accuracy and knowledge of national medical waste reduction initiatives or high self-reported cost consciousness. Hospitalists with the highest self-reported cost consciousness were the least accurate in estimating costs for commonly ordered laboratory studies, medications, or imaging studies. Respondents overestimated the cost of all items with the largest percent difference with medications. Hospitalists practicing over 15 years had the highest cost accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of pediatric hospitalists lack knowledge on national waste reduction initiatives. Improving the cost-accuracy of pediatric hospitalists may not reduce health care costs as they overestimated many hospital costs. Median unit cost lists could be a resource for educating medical students and residents about health care costs.

Applications of Behavioral Economics to Pharmaceutical Policymaking: A Scoping Review with Implications for Best-Value Biological Medicines

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pharmaceutical policies are generally based on the assumption that involved stakeholders make rational decisions. However, behavioral economics has taught us that this is not always the case as people deviate from rational behavior in rather predictable patterns. This scoping review examined to what extent behavioral concepts have already been applied in the pharmaceutical domain and what evidence exists about their effectiveness, with the aim of formulating future applications and research hypotheses on policymaking for best-value biologicals.

METHODS

A scoping literature review was conducted on the evidence of behavioral applications to pharmaceuticals. Scientific databases (Embase, MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, and Scopus) were searched up to 20 October, 2021.

RESULTS

Forty-four full-text scientific articles were identified and narratively described in this article. Pharmaceutical domains where behavioral concepts have been investigated relate to influencing prescribing behavior, improving medication adherence, and increasing vaccination uptake. Multiple behavioral concepts were examined in the identified studies, such as social norms, defaults, framing, loss aversion, availability, and present bias. The effectiveness of the applied interventions was generally positive, but depended on the context. Some of the examined interventions can easily be translated into effective policy interventions for best-value biological medicines. However, some applications require further investigation in a research context.

CONCLUSIONS

Applications of behavioral economics to pharmaceutical policymaking are promising. However, further research is required to investigate the effect of behavioral applications on policy interventions for a more sustainable market environment for best-value biological medicines.

Effects of Real-time Prescription Benefit Recommendations on Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Rising drug costs contribute to medication nonadherence and adverse health outcomes. Real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) systems present prescribers with patient-specific out-of-pocket cost estimates and recommend lower-cost, clinically appropriate alternatives at the point of prescribing.

Objective

To investigate whether RTPB recommendations lead to reduced patient out-of-pocket costs for medications.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cluster randomized trial, medical practices in a large, urban academic health system were randomly assigned to RTPB recommendations from January 13 to July 31, 2021. Participants were adult patients receiving outpatient prescriptions during the study period. The analysis was limited to prescriptions for which RTPB could recommend an available alternative. Electronic health record data were used to analyze the intervention's effects on prescribing. Data analyses were performed from August 20, 2021, to June 8, 2022.

Interventions

When a prescription was initiated in the electronic health record, the RTPB system recommended available lower-cost, clinically appropriate alternatives for a different medication, length of prescription, and/or choice of pharmacy. The prescriber could select either the initiated order or one of the recommended options.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patient out-of-pocket cost for a prescription. Secondary outcomes were whether a mail-order prescription and a 90-day supply were ordered.

Results

Of 867 757 outpatient prescriptions at randomized practices, 36 419 (4.2%) met the inclusion criteria of having an available alternative. Out-of-pocket costs were $39.90 for a 30-day supply in the intervention group and $67.80 for a 30-day supply in the control group. The intervention led to an adjusted 11.2%; (95% CI, -15.7% to -6.4%) reduction in out-of-pocket costs. Mail-order pharmacy use was 9.6% and 7.6% in the intervention and control groups, respectively (adjusted 1.9 percentage point increase; 95% CI, 0.9 to 3.0). Rates of 90-day supply were not different. In high-cost drug classes, the intervention reduced out-of-pocket costs by 38.9%; 95% CI, -47.6% to -28.7%.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cluster randomized clinical trial showed that RTPB recommendations led to lower patient out-of-pocket costs, with the largest savings occurring for high-cost medications. However, RTPB recommendations were made for only a small percentage of prescriptions.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04940988; American Economic Association Registry: AEARCTR-0006909.

Using nudges to promote clinical decision making of healthcare professionals: A scoping review

Nudging has been discussed in the context of policy and public health, but not so much within healthcare. This scoping review aimed to assess the empirical evidence on how nudging techniques can be used to affect the behavior of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in clinical settings. A systematic database search was conducted for the period January 2010-December 2020 using the PRISMA extension for Scoping Review checklist. Two reviewers independently screened each article for inclusion. Included articles were reviewed to extract key information about each intervention, including purpose, target behavior, measured outcomes, key findings, nudging strategies, intervention objectives and their theoretical underpinnings. Two independent dimensions, building on Kahneman's System 1 and System 2, were used to describe nudging strategies according to user action and timing of their implementation. Of the included 51 articles, 40 reported statistically significant results, six were not significant and two reported mixed results. Thirteen different nudging strategies were identified aimed at modifying four types of HPCs' behavior: prescriptions and orders, procedure, hand hygiene, and vaccination. The most common nudging strategy employed were defaults or pre-orders, followed by alerts or reminders, and active choice. Many interventions did not require any deliberate action from users, here termed passive interventions, such as automatically changing prescriptions to their generic equivalent unless indicated by the user. Passive nudges may be successful in changing the target outcome but may go unnoticed by the user. Future work should consider the broader ethical implications of passive nudges.

Changes in the Use of Brand Name and Generic Medications and Total Prescription Cost Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Epilepsy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To characterize trends in antiseizure medication (ASM) fills and total prescription costs in people with epilepsy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of beneficiaries with epilepsy (ASM, plus ICD codes) in a 20% random Medicare sample, with continuous Fee-For-Service coverage (Parts A, B, and D) in 2008-2018. We summed the number of pill days and costs (adjusted to 2018 dollars) per person-year for each ASM. ASMs were categorized into brand vs generic, first vs newer generation, and enzyme inducers vs noninducers.

RESULTS

There were 77,000-133,000 beneficiaries with epilepsy per year. The most common ASM was phenytoin in 2008, which shifted to levetiracetam in 2018 (2008: phenytoin 25%, levetiracetam 14%; 2018: phenytoin 9%, levetiracetam 27%). Brand name (2008: 56%; 2018: 14%), first-generation (2008: 55%; 2018: 32%), and enzyme-inducing ASMs (2008: 44%; 2018: 24%) each decreased over time as a proportion of pill days. The number of brand pill days per person-year initially decreased (e.g., 2008: 250; 2009: 121; 2010: 96) but then plateaued (2013-2018: between 66 and 69) given a notable increase in lacosamide pill days per person (2008: 0; 2018: 20). Total brand name costs per year initially decreased 2008-2010 (2008: $150 million; 2010: $72 million) but then increased after 2010 (2018: $256 million). In 2018, brand name ASMs represented 79% of costs despite representing only 14% of pill days, a 1-year pill supply became 277% more expensive for brand name medications but 42% less expensive for generic medications over time (2008: brand ∼$2,800 vs generic ∼$800; 2018: brand ∼$10,700 vs generic ∼$460), and many common brand name ASMs cost approximately 10-fold more per pill day than their generic equivalents.

DISCUSSION

First-generation and enzyme-inducing ASMs waned from 2008 to 2018. Although brand name ASMs initially waned translating into lower costs and potentially higher value care, after 2010, brand name costs markedly increased because of increasing use of lacosamide plus a 277% increase in per-pill cost of brand name ASMs. Brand name ASMs represented a minority of prescriptions, but the majority of costs.

Development and validation of a social vulnerabilities survey for medical inpatients

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to validate a Social Vulnerabilities Survey that was developed to identify patient barriers in the following domains: (1) salience or priority of health; (2) social support; (3) transportation; and (4) finances.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional psychometric study.Questions for one domain (health salience) were developed de novo while questions for the other domains were derived from national surveys and/or previously validated questionnaires. We tested construct (ie, convergent and discriminative) validity for these new questions through hypothesis testing of correlations between question responses and patient characteristics. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine structural validity of the survey as a whole.

SETTING

Patients admitted to the inpatient internal medicine service at a tertiary care hospital in Calgary, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 406 patients were included in the study.

RESULTS

The mean age of respondents was 55.5 (SD 18.6) years, with the majority being men (55.4%). In feasibility testing of the first 107 patients, the Social Vulnerabilities Survey was felt to be acceptable, comprehensive and met face validity. Hypothesis testing of the health salience questions revealed that the majority of observed correlations were exactly as predicted. Exploratory factor analysis of the global survey revealed the presence of five factors (eigenvalue >1): social support, health salience, drug insurance, transportation barriers and drug costs. All but four questions loaded to these five factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The Social Vulnerabilities Survey has face, construct and structural validity. It can be used to measure modifiable social vulnerabilities, such that their effects on health outcomes can be explored and understood.

Optimization of Medication Point-Of-Prescribing Alerts at a Multi-Site, Ambulatory Care Organization to Aid Clinical Care and Reduce HealthCare Cost

BACKGROUND

Literature has shown the integration of electronic alerts into patient care has the potential to improve clinicians' workflow by saving time, increasing efficiency, and improving patient safety. However, despite these possible benefits of alerts, studies have shown that alerts are often overridden by clinicians.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to optimize the acceptance rates of medication point-of-prescribing alerts within the electronic medical record (EMR) of an ambulatory care organization.

METHODS

The study design evaluated the actions taken by clinicians when they were presented with medication point-of-prescribing alerts. These alerts were created by the clinical pharmacy informatics team to help promote cost-effective and safe prescribing. Alerts determined to be high value alerts were optimized to increase clinicians' likelihood of accepting each alert's recommended alternative. The primary objective was to increase acceptance rates of high value alerts. The exploratory objective was to identify the estimated annualized cost-savings when high value alerts were accepted, and a lower cost alternative prescription resulted.

RESULTS

The acceptance rate of the optimized point-of-prescribing alerts increased to 8.7%, compared to a 3.2% acceptance in the pre-modification period (P <.001). The lower cost alternative prescriptions that resulted from the accepted alerts translated into an estimated annualized cost-savings of over 2 million dollars.

CONCLUSION

The use of point-of-prescribing alerts with optimized information and specific cost comparisons in an ambulatory setting led to an increase in the acceptance rates of the alerts and more cost-conscious prescribing.

Health informatics interventions to minimize out-of-pocket medication costs for patients: what providers want

Objective

To explore diverse provider perspectives on: strategies for addressing patient medication cost barriers; patient medication cost information gaps; current medication cost-related informatics tools; and design features for future tool development.

Materials and Methods

We conducted 38 semistructured interviews with providers (physicians, nurses, pharmacists, social workers, and administrators) in a Midwestern health system in the United States. We used 3 rounds of qualitative coding to identify themes.

Results

Providers lacked access to information about: patients’ ability to pay for medications; true costs of full medication regimens; and cost impacts of patient insurance changes. Some providers said that while existing cost-related tools were helpful, they contained unclear insurance information and several questioned the information’s quality. Cost-related information was not available to everyone who needed it and was not always available when needed. Fragmentation of information across sources made cost-alleviation information difficult to access. Providers desired future tools to compare medication costs more directly; provide quick references on costs to facilitate clinical conversations; streamline medication resource referrals; and provide centrally accessible visual summaries of patient affordability challenges.

Discussion

These findings can inform the next generation of informatics tools for minimizing patients’ out-of-pocket costs. Future tools should support the work of a wider range of providers and situations and use cases than current tools do. Such tools would have the potential to improve prescribing decisions and better link patients to resources.

Conclusion

Results identified opportunities to fill multidisciplinary providers’ information gaps and ways in which new tools could better support medication affordability for patients.

Almost a quarter of Americans taking prescription medications have difficulty affording them. We asked 38 healthcare providers what they do to help patients get affordable medications. They try to reduce the number of medications that patients take, choose more affordable medication options, and connect them to free medications or financial help. But it is hard for providers to do these things because they don’t always know which patients have financial challenges, and they may not know how much medications cost patients. Healthcare providers use digital tools like ordering systems to pick medications for patients, but they do not always have clear price information and they do not help outside of healthcare visits with prescribers. It is also hard for healthcare providers to get information about what patients have difficulty affording medications, and about resources to help them. Healthcare providers want new and improved digital tools to help them choose medications, and to be able to compare exact medication price differences. They also want a visual sign for patients with financial challenges, and centralized information about cost reduction resources. Finally, they desire tools to help them talk to patients about mediation prices, and medication price reports for patients themselves.

Consumers’ access to information about medicine prices and availability as an enabler of last mile medicine access: A scoping review

Information about where medicines are in stock and how much they cost facilitates consumers’ timely access to affordable medicines by enabling price comparisons and the identification of stockists. Our aims were to: (1) Review how consumer access to price and availability information is engaged within the Medicine Access discourse and (2) identify factors associated with the existence of interventions that provide consumers with medicine availability and price information. We conducted two scoping reviews. We reviewed 26 medicine access and pharmaceutical system strengthening frameworks to assess how they conceptualise information access. We then reviewed four interventions that provide consumers with availability and price information to identify the factors associated with these interventions’ existence. We found that in the medical access discourse, information is mainly cast as helpful to entities that ensure medicine access for populations. Information as an enabler of medicine procurement for consumers/households is less emphasised. We then identified the following eight factors that facilitate consumer access to reliable medicine price and availability information: the recognition of a medicine access problem that can be mitigated by consumer access to information; cross-sectoral collaboration; the willingness of medicine sellers to disclose their inventory information; having information quality control measures; appropriate incentives for intervention adoption; enabling legal environments; systems of pooling information; and access to digital information technology infrastructure. We recommend that more theoretical and implementation attention ought to be directed at how medicine price and medicine availability information can empower individual consumers to make sound purchasing decisions.

Nudging healthcare professionals in clinical settings: a scoping review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Healthcare organisations are in constant need of improvement and change. Nudging has been proposed as a strategy to affect people's choices and has been used to affect patients' behaviour in healthcare settings. However, little is known about how nudging is being interpreted and applied to change the behaviour of healthcare professionals (HCPs). The objective of this review is to identify interventions using nudge theory to affect the behaviour of HCPs in clinical settings.

METHODS

A scoping review. We searched PubMed and PsycINFO for articles published from 2010 to September 2019, including terms related to "nudging" in the title or abstract. Two reviewers screened articles for inclusion based on whether the articles described an intervention to change the behaviour of HCPs. Two reviewers extracted key information and categorized included articles. Descriptive analyses were performed on the data.

RESULTS

Search results yielded 997 unique articles, of which 25 articles satisfied the inclusion criteria. Five additional articles were selected from the reference lists of the included articles. We identified 11 nudging strategies: accountable justification, goal setting, suggested alternatives, feedback, information transparency, peer comparison, active choice, alerts and reminders, environmental cueing/priming, defaults/pre-orders, and education. These strategies were employed to affect the following 4 target behaviours: vaccination of staff, hand hygiene, clinical procedures, prescriptions and orders. To compare approaches across so many areas, we introduced two independent dimensions to describe nudging strategies: synchronous/asynchronous, and active/passive.

CONCLUSION

There are relatively few studies published referring to nudge theory aimed at changing HCP behaviour in clinical settings. These studies reflect a diverse set of objectives and implement nudging strategies in a variety of ways. We suggest distinguishing active from passive nudging strategies. Passive nudging strategies may achieve the desired outcome but go unnoticed by the clinician thereby not really changing a behaviour and raising ethical concerns. Our review indicates that there are successful active strategies that engage with clinicians in a more deliberate way. However, more research is needed on how different nudging strategies impact HCP behaviour in the short and long term to improve clinical decision making.

Clinicians' Values and Preferences for Medication Adherence and Cost Clinical Decision Support in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Medication nonadherence and unaffordability are prevalent, burdensome issues in primary care. In response, technology companies are capitalizing on clinical decision support (CDS) to deliver patient-specific information regarding medication adherence and costs to clinicians using electronic health records (EHRs). To maximize adoption and usability, these CDS tools should be designed with consideration of end users' values and preferences.

OBJECTIVE

This article evaluates primary care clinicians' values and preferences for a medication adherence and cost CDS.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with primary care clinicians with prescribing privileges and EHR access to identify clinicians' perceptions of and approaches to assessing medication adherence and costs, and to determine perceived values and preferences for medication adherence and cost CDS. Interviews were conducted until saturation of responses was reached. ATLAS.ti was used for thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Among 26 clinicians interviewed, themes identified included a high value, but moderate need for a medication adherence CDS and high value and need for cost CDS. Clinicians expressed the cost CDS would provide actionable solutions and greatly impact patient care. Another theme identified was a desire for medication adherence and cost CDS to be separate tools yet integrated into workflow. The majority of clinicians preferred a medication adherence CDS that integrated claims data and actively displayed data using color-coded adherence categories within patients' medication lists in the EHR. For the cost CDS, clinicians preferred medication out-of-pocket costs and a list of cheaper or payor-preferred alternatives to display within the order queue of the EHR.

CONCLUSION

We identified valuable insights regarding clinician values and preferences for medication adherence and cost CDS. Overall, primary care clinicians feel CDS for medication adherence and cost are valuable and prefer them to be separate. These insights should be used to inform the design, implementation, and EHR integration of future medication and cost CDS tools.