Physician Cost Consciousness and Use of Low-Value Clinical Services

Arthroscopic transosseous anchorless rotator cuff repair reduces bone defects related to peri-implant cyst formation: a comparison with conventional suture anchors using propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

The transosseous anchorless repair (ToR) technique was recently introduced to avoid suture anchor-related problems. While favorable outcomes of the ToR technique have been reported, no previous studies on peri-implant cyst formation with the ToR technique exist. Therefore, this study compared the clinical outcomes and prevalence of peri-implant cyst formation between the ToR technique and the conventional transosseous equivalent technique using suture anchors (SA).

METHODS

Cases with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) between 2016 and 2018 treated with the double-row suture bridge technique were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into ToR and SA groups. To compare clinical outcomes, 19 ToR and 57 SA cases without intraoperative implant failure were selected using propensity score matching (PSM). While intraoperative implant failure rate was analyzed before PSM, retear rate, peri-implant cyst formation rate, and functional outcomes were compared after PSM.

RESULTS

The intraoperative implant failure rate (ToR, 8% vs. SA, 15.3%) and retear rate (ToR, 5.3% vs. SA, 19.3%) did not differ between the two groups (all P>0.05). However, peri-implant cysts were not observed in the ToR group, while they were observed in 16.7% of the SA group (P=0.008). Postoperative functional outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups (all P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The ToR technique produced comparable clinical outcomes to conventional techniques. Considering the prospect of potential additional surgeries, the absence of peri-implant cyst formation might be an advantage of ToR. Furthermore, ToR might reduce the medical costs related to suture anchors and, thereby, could be a useful option for ARCR. Level of evidence: III.

Healthcare cost consciousness among physicians and their attitudes towards controlling costs in Jordan: a cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

One of the most significant factors influencing medication adherence and, ultimately, therapeutic outcomes for patients is the cost. The aim of this study was to examine the cost-containment strategies used by physicians in Jordan while focusing on the importance of cost consciousness in addressing healthcare costs and its consequences.

METHOD

A quantitative study was conducted between June 19 and November 15, 2021, through a cross-sectional survey using a self-administered questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 389 physicians participated in this study. Governments (65.6%), health insurance companies (60.2%), and pharmaceutical and device manufacturers (57.9%) were the most frequently mentioned entities as being primarily responsible for reducing healthcare costs. Participating physicians showed a high level of enthusiasm towards all domains of reducing healthcare costs with a mean percentage of 88.3% (standard deviation (SD): 0.04). When discussing physicians' roles in containing healthcare costs and the effects of cost-conscious practice, most respondents agreed that there is currently too much emphasis on test and procedure costs (83.0%), that decision support tools that show costs would be helpful in their practice (84.5%), and that physicians need to take a more prominent role in limiting the use of unnecessary tests (86.0%). Around 70.0% of physicians agreed that they requested more tests when they did not know the patient well, and 80.0% of them stated that they considered the uncertainty involved in patient care to be disconcerting.

CONCLUSION

Participating physicians showed a moderate level of cost consciousness in Jordan. However, this must be higher because it will eventually lead to cost-related nonadherence, which will have a negative impact on the patient's health.

Information Asymmetry in Hospitals: Evidence of the Lack of Cost Awareness in Clinicians

BACKGROUND

Information asymmetries and the agency relationship are two defining features of the healthcare system. These market failures are often used as a rationale for government intervention. Many countries have government financing and provision of healthcare in order to correct for this, while health technology agencies also exist to improve efficiency. However, informational asymmetries and the resulting principal-agent problem still persist, and one example is the lack of cost awareness amongst clinicians. This study explores the cost awareness of clinicians across different settings.

METHODS

We targeted four clinical cohorts: medical students, Senior House Officers/Interns, Mid-grade Senior Registrar/Residents, and Consultant/Attending Physicians, in six hospitals in the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Spain. The survey asked respondents to report the cost (as they recalled) of different types of scans, visits, medications and tests. Our analysis focused on the differential between the perceived/recalled cost and the actual cost. We explored variation across speciality, country and other potential confounders. Cost-awareness levels were estimated based on the cost estimates within 25% of the actual cost.

RESULTS

We received 705 complete responses from six sites across five countries. Our analysis found that respondents often overestimated the cost of common tests while underestimating high-cost tests. The mean cost-awareness levels varied between 4 and 23% for different items. Respondents acknowledged that they did not feel they had received adequate training in cost awareness.

DISCUSSION

The current financial climate means that cost awareness and the appropriate use of scarce healthcare resources is more paramount than perhaps ever before. Much of the focus of health economics research is on high-cost innovative technologies, yet there is considerable waste in the system with respect to overtreatment and overdiagnosis. Common reasons put forward for this include defensive medicine, poor education, clinical uncertainty and the institution of protocols.

CONCLUSION

Given the role of clinicians in the healthcare system, as agents both for patients and for providers, more needs to be done to remove informational asymmetries and improve clinician cost awareness.

Participation of Lower and Upper Middle-Income Countries in Clinical Trials Led by High-Income Countries

IMPORTANCE

Many randomized clinical trials (RCTs) led by high-income countries (HICs) now enroll patients from lower middle-income countries (LMICs) and upper middle-income countries (UMICs). Although enrolling diverse populations promotes research collaborations, there are issues regarding which countries participate in RCTs and how this participation may contribute to global research.

OBJECTIVE

To describe which UMICs and LMICs participate in RCTs led by HICs.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A cross-sectional study of all oncology RCTs published globally during January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2017, was conducted. The study cohort was restricted to RCTs led by HICs that enrolled participants from LMICs and UMICs. Study analyses were conducted in November 1, 2021, to May 31, 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A bibliometric approach (Web of Science 2007-2017) was used to explore whether RCT participation was proportional to other measures of cancer research activity. Participation in RCTs (ie, percentage of RCTs in the cohort in which each LMIC and UMIC participated) was compared with country-level cancer research bibliometric output (ie, percentage of total cancer research bibliometric output from the same group of countries that came from a specific LMIC and UMIC).

RESULTS

Among the 636 HIC-led RCTs, 186 trials (29%) enrolled patients in LMICs (n = 84 trials involving 11 LMICs) and/or UMICs (n = 181 trials involving 26 UMICs). The most common participating LMICs were India (42 [50%]), Ukraine (39 [46%]), Philippines (23 [27%]), and Egypt (12 [14%]). The most common participating UMICs were Russia (115 [64%]), Brazil (94 [52%]), Romania (62 [34%]), China (56 [31%]), Mexico (56 [31%]), and South Africa (54 [30%]). Several LMICs are overrepresented in the cohort of RCTs based on proportional cancer research bibliometric output: Ukraine (46% of RCTs but 2% of cancer research bibliometric output), Philippines (27% RCTs, 1% output), and Georgia (8% RCTs, 0.2% output). Overrepresented UMICs include Russia (64% RCTs, 2% output), Romania (34% RCTs, 2% output), Mexico (31% RCTs, 2% output), and South Africa (30% RCTs, 1% output).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cross-sectional study, a substantial proportion of RCTs led by HICs enrolled patients in LMICs and UMICs. The LMICs and UMICs that participated in these trials did not match overall cancer bibliometric output as a surrogate for research ecosystem maturity. Reasons for this apparent discordance and how these data may inform future capacity-strengthening activities require further study.

Choosing Wisely—Barriers and Solutions to Implementation in Low and Middle-Income Countries

Globally, there is increasing emphasis on value-based cancer care. Rising healthcare costs and reduced health care spending and budgets, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), call for patients, providers, and healthcare systems to apply the Choose Wisely (CW) approach. This approach seeks to advance a dialogue on avoiding unnecessary medical tests, treatments, and procedures. Several factors have been described as barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the Choosing Wisely recommendations in high-income countries but none for LMICs. In this review, we attempt to classify potential barriers to the Choose Wisely implementation relative to the sources of behavior and potential intervention functions that can be implemented in order to reduce these barriers.

Cost-consciousness among Chinese medical staff: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Rapidly increasing health care costs are a widespread problem in the world. The cost-consciousness among Chinese medical staff is an important topic that needs further investigation. Our study aimed to focus on the cost-consciousness of Chinese medical staff and explore the factors related to their cost-consciousness. Differences regarding cost-consciousness between doctors and nurses were also reported.

METHODS

Eight hospitals in Liaoning Province, China, were surveyed using a self-reporting questionnaire. A total of 1043 respondents, including 635 doctors and 408 nurses, participated in the study. A revised Chinese Cost-consciousness Scale was used to estimate cost-consciousness.

RESULTS

The mean score of the Cost-consciousness Scale was 27.60 and 28.18 among doctors and nurses, respectively, and there were no significant differences in any personal characteristics. Most Chinese medical staff were aware of the treatment costs and considered cost control as their responsibility. Chinese doctors disliked adhering to guidelines more and preferred to remain independent in making or denying a treatment decision; thus, they like autonomously balancing the treatment and cost. Chinese nurses have similar attitudes, but nurses tended to deny costly services and interventions and were more sensitive to the health care costs by rationing decisions and uncertainty in their medical practice.

CONCLUSION

We reveal the attitudes regarding cost-consciousness among Chinese medical staff. Chinese medical staff was aware of their responsibility in health cost control. Chinese doctors and nurses had different tendencies with regard to health care cost containment. Our study highlights the importance of education and professional training on cost-consciousness.

Identifying and prioritizing do-not-do recommendations in Dutch primary care

BACKGROUND

Low-value care provides minimal or no benefit for the patient, wastes resources, and can cause harm. Explicit do-not-do recommendations in clinical guidelines are a first step in reducing low-value care. The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize do-not-do recommendations in general practice guidelines with priority for implementation.

METHODS

We used a mixed method design in Dutch primary care. First, we identified do-not-do recommendations through a systematic assessment of 92 Dutch guidelines for general practitioners (GPs), resulting in 385 do-not-do recommendations. Second, we selected 146 recommendations addressing high prevalent conditions. Third, a random sample of 5000 Dutch GPs was invited for an online survey to prioritize recommendations based on the prevalence of the condition and low-value care practice, potential harm, and potential cost reduction on a scale from 1 to 5/6. Total scores could range from 4 to 22. Recommendations with a median score > 12 were included. In total, 440 GPs completed the survey.

RESULTS

The selection process led to 30 prioritised recommendations. These covered drug treatments (n = 12), diagnostics (n = 10), referral to other healthcare professions (n = 5), and non-drug treatment (n = 3).

CONCLUSION

Dutch clinical guidelines include many do-not-do recommendations that are perceived as highly relevant by the GPs. The list of 30 high-priority do-not-do recommendations can be used to raise awareness of low-value care among GPs. As the recommendations are supported with the latest evidence from international studies, primary healthcare professionals and policy makers worldwide can use the list for further validating the list in their local context and designing strategies to reduce low-value care.

Determinants for the use and de-implementation of low-value care in health care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

A considerable proportion of interventions provided to patients lack evidence of their effectiveness. This implies that patients may receive ineffective, unnecessary or even harmful care. However, despite some empirical studies in the field, there has been no synthesis of determinants impacting the use of low-value care (LVC) and the process of de-implementing LVC.

AIM

The aim was to identify determinants influencing the use of LVC, as well as determinants for de-implementation of LVC practices in health care.

METHODS

A scoping review was performed based on the framework by Arksey and O'Malley. We searched four scientific databases, conducted snowball searches of relevant articles and hand searched the journal Implementation Science for peer-reviewed journal articles in English. Articles were included if they were empirical studies reporting on determinants for the use of LVC or de-implementation of LVC. The abstract review and the full-text review were conducted in duplicate and conflicting decisions were discussed until consensus was reached. Data were charted using a piloted data charting form and the determinants were inductively coded and categorised in an iterative process conducted by the project group.

RESULTS

In total, 101 citations were included in the review. Of these, 92 reported on determinants for the use of LVC and nine on determinants for de-implementation. The studies were conducted in a range of health care settings and investigated a variety of LVC practices with LVC medication prescriptions, imaging and screening procedures being the most common. The identified determinants for the use of LVC as well as for de-implementation of LVC practices broadly concerned: patients, professionals, outer context, inner context, process and evidence and LVC practice. The results were discussed in relation to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

CONCLUSION

The identified determinants largely overlap with existing implementation frameworks, although patient expectations and professionals' fear of malpractice appear to be more prominent determinants for the use and de-implementation of LVC. Thus, existing implementation determinant frameworks may require adaptation to be transferable to de-implementation. Strategies to reduce the use of LVC should specifically consider determinants for the use and de-implementation of LVC.

REGISTRATION

The review has not been registered.

Exploring provider- and practice-level drivers of cost-consciousness in breast cancer reconstruction-secondary analysis of a survey of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons

BACKGROUND

The role of physicians in dampening health care costs is a renewed focus of policy-makers. We examined provider- and practice-level factors affecting four domains of cost-consciousness among plastic surgeons performing breast reconstruction.

METHODS

Secondary analysis was performed on the survey responses of 329 surgeons who routinely performed breast reconstruction. Using a 5-point Likert scale, we queried four domains of cost-consciousness: out-of-pocket cost awareness, cost discussions, cognizance of patients' financial burden, and attitudes regarding cost discussions. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify provider- and practice-level factors affecting these domains according to composite scores.

RESULTS

Overall cost-consciousness scores (CS) were moderate and ranged from 2.14 to 4.30. There were no significant differences across practice settings. Male gender (p = 0.048), Hispanic ethnicity (p = 0.021), and increasing clinical experience (p = 0.015) were associated with higher out-of-pocket cost awareness. Increasing surgeon experience was also associated with having cost discussions (p = 0.039). No provider- or practice-level factors were associated with cognizance of patients' financial burden. Salaried physicians displayed a more positive attitude toward out-of-pocket cost discussions (p = 0.049). On pairwise testing, the out-of-pocket cost awareness was significantly different between Hispanic surgeons and white surgeons (4.30 vs. 3.55), and between surgeons with more than 20 years' experience and with less than 5 years' experience (3.87 vs. 3.37).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeon gender, ethnicity, and experience and practice compensation type inform various domains of cost-consciousness in breast reconstruction. Structural and behavioral interventions could possibly increase physicians' cost-consciousness.

Attitudes and awareness of suture anchor cost: a survey of shoulder surgeons performing rotator cuff repairs

BACKGROUND

The cost of health care in the United States accounts for 18% of the nation's gross domestic product and is expected to reach 20% by 2020. Physicians are responsible for 60%-80% of decisions resulting in health care expenditures. Rotator cuff repairs account for $1.2-$1.6 billion in US health care expenditures annually. The purpose of this study is to assess surgeons' cost awareness in the setting of rotator cuff repairs. The hypothesis is that practice environment and training affect cost consciousness and incentivization will lead to more cost-effective choices.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, a 21-item survey was distributed via the email list services of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Arthroscopy Association of North America. Data collected included demographics, variables regarding rotator cuff repair (technique, number of companies used, procedures per month), and knowledge of costs.

RESULTS

Responses from 345 surgeons in 23 countries were obtained with the majority (89%) being from the United States. Most surgeons were "cost-conscious" (275, 70.7%). Of these surgeons, 62.9% are willing to switch suture anchors brands to reduce overall costs if incentivized. Cost-conscious surgeons were more likely to be fellowship trained in shoulder and elbow (51.81% vs. 38.57%, P = .048), be paid based on productivity (73.53% vs. 61.43%, P = .047), and receive shared profits (85.4% vs. 75%, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The majority of orthopedic surgeons are both cost-conscious and willing to change their practice to reduce costs if incentivized to do so. A better understanding of implant costs combined with incentives may help reduce health care expenditure.

Reassessment Intervals for Transition From Low to High Fracture Risk Among Adults Older Than 50 Years

IMPORTANCE

Fracture risk scores are used to identify individuals at high risk of major osteoporotic fracture or hip fracture for antiosteoporosis treatment. For those not meeting treatment thresholds at baseline, the optimal interval for reassessing fracture risk is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To examine reassessment intervals for transition from low to high fracture risk under guidelines-defined treatment thresholds.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study included persons aged 50 years or older with fracture risk below treatment thresholds at baseline who had fracture risk reassessed at least 1 year later. Data were obtained from a population-based bone mineral density registry (baseline assessment during 1996-2015; reassessment to 2016) in the Province of Manitoba, Canada. Primary analysis was performed from May to June 2019. Analysis for the revision was performed in October 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was time to transition from low (below the treatment threshold) to high fracture risk (treatment-qualifying risk score using osteoporosis clinical practice guidelines strategies for Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom).

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 10 564 individuals (94.1% women; mean [SD] age at baseline, 63.2 [8.2] years). At the time of reassessment (a mean [SD] interval of 5.2 [2.9] years between initial and subsequent fracture risk assessment), 690 (6.6%) had reached the fixed major osteoporotic fracture treatment threshold of 20%, 1546 (16.2%) had reached the fixed hip treatment threshold of 3%, and 932 (9.4%) had reached the age-dependent major osteoporotic fracture treatment threshold. Among those below 25% of the treatment threshold at baseline for each guideline, few (0%-3.0%) reached guidelines-defined high fracture risk at follow-up. In contrast, among those at the upper end of the scale for each guideline (75%-99% of the treatment threshold at baseline), 30.6% to 74.4% reached guidelines-defined high fracture risk. An increased number of clinical risk factors was associated with increased likelihood of reaching guidelines-defined high fracture risk (range for 3 guidelines, 17.1%-28.2%) compared with unchanged or decreased clinical risk factors (range for 3 guidelines, 3.3%-12.8%) (P < .001). Estimated time for 10% of the population to reach treatment-qualifying high fracture risk ranged from fewer than 3 years to more than 15 years.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings suggest that baseline fracture risk (as a fraction of the treatment threshold) and change in clinical risk factors can identify individuals with low and high probability of guidelines-defined high fracture risk during follow-up, thereby potentially helping to inform the reassessment interval.

Prevalence and Cost of Care Cascades After Low-Value Preoperative Electrocardiogram for Cataract Surgery in Fee-for-Service Medicare Beneficiaries

IMPORTANCE

Low-value care is prevalent in the United States, yet little is known about the downstream health care use triggered by low-value services. Measurement of such care cascades is essential to understanding the full consequences of low-value care.

OBJECTIVE

To describe cascades (tests, treatments, visits, hospitalizations, and new diagnoses) after a common low-value service, preoperative electrocardiogram (EKG) for patients undergoing cataract surgery.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Observational cohort study using fee-for-service Medicare claims data from beneficiaries aged 66 years or older without known heart disease who were continuously enrolled between April 1, 2013, and September 30, 2015, and underwent cataract surgery between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2015. Data were analyzed from March 12, 2018, to April 9, 2019.

EXPOSURES

Receipt of a preoperative EKG. The comparison group included patients who underwent cataract surgery but did not receive a preoperative EKG.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Cascade event rates and associated spending in the 90 days after preoperative EKG, or in a matched timeframe for the comparison group. Secondary outcomes were patient, physician, and area-level characteristics associated with experiencing a potential cascade.

RESULTS

Among 110 183 cataract surgery recipients, 12 408 (11.3%) received a preoperative EKG (65.6% of them were female); of those, 1978 (15.9%) had at least 1 potential cascade event. The comparison group included 97 775 participants (63.1% female). Those who received a preoperative EKG experienced between 5.11 (95% CI, 3.96-6.25) and 10.92 (95% CI, 9.76-12.08) additional events per 100 beneficiaries relative to the comparison group. This included between 2.18 (95% CI, 1.34-3.02) and 7.98 (95% CI, 7.12-8.84) tests, 0.33 (95% CI, 0.19-0.46) treatments, 1.40 (95% CI, 1.18-1.62) new patient cardiology visits, and 1.21 (95% CI, 0.62-1.79) new cardiac diagnoses. Spending for the additional services was up to $565 per Medicare beneficiary (95% CI, $342-$775), or an estimated $35 025 923 annually across all Medicare beneficiaries in addition to the $3 275 712 paid for the preoperative EKGs. Among preoperative EKG recipients, those who were older (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for patients aged 75 to 84 years vs 66 to 74 years old, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.28-1.57), had more chronic conditions (aOR for each additional Elixhauser condition, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.14-1.22), lived in more cardiologist-dense areas (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.09), or had their preoperative EKG performed by a cardiac specialist rather than a primary care physician (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.10-1.43) were more likely to experience a potential cascade.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Care cascades after preoperative EKG for cataract surgery are infrequent but costly. Policy and practice interventions to reduce low-value services and the cascades that follow could yield substantial savings.

Translation, transcultural adaptation, and validation of the role-modeling cost-conscious behaviors scale

BACKGROUND

Training in the use of cost-conscious strategies for medical students may prepare new physicians to deliver health care in a more sustainable way. Recently, a role-modeling cost-conscious behaviors scale (RMCCBS) was developed for assessing students' perceptions of their teachers' attitudes to cost consciousness. We aimed to translate the RMCCBS into Brazilian Portuguese, adapt the scale, transculturally, and validate it.

METHODS

We adopted rigorous methodological approaches for translating, transculturally adapting and validating the original scale English version into Brazilian Portuguese. We invited all 400 undergraduate medical students enrolled in the 5th and 6th years of a medical course in Northeast Brazil between January and March 2017 to participate. Of the 400 students, 281 accepted to take part in the study. We analyzed the collected data using the SPSS software version 21 and structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed using AMOS SPSS version 18. We conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA), varimax rotation, with Kaiser Normalization and Principal Axis Factoring extraction method. We conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), using the SEM. We used the following indexes of adherence of the model: Comparative fit index (CFI), Goodness-of-fit index (GFI) and Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI). We considered the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) for Sample-size adjusted. The root mean square error of approximation was calculated. Values below 0.08 were considered acceptable. Composite reliability analyzes were performed to evaluate the accuracy of the instrument. Values above 0.70 were considered satisfactory.

RESULTS

Of the 281 undergraduate medical students, 195 (69.3%) were female. Mean age of participants was 25.0 ± 2.6 years. In the EFA, the KMO was 0.720 and the Bartlett sphericity test was significant (p < 0.001). We conducted the EFA into two factors: role-modeling cost-conscious behaviors in health (seven items) and health waste behaviors (six items). The 13 item-scale was submitted to composite reliability analyzes, obtaining values of 0.813 and 0.761 for the role-modeling cost-conscious behaviors and the health waste behaviors factors, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that the cost-conscious behaviors scale has good psychometric properties and is a valid and reliable instrument for evaluating medical students' perception of their teachers' cost-conscious behaviors.

Healthcare professionals' opinions, barriers and facilitators towards low-value clinical practices in the hospital setting

OBJECTIVE

To explore healthcare professionals' opinions about low-value practices, identify practices of this kind possibly present in the hospital and barriers and facilitators to reduce them. Low-value practices include those with little or no clinical benefit that may harm patients or lead to a waste of resources.

METHOD

Using a mixed methodology, we carried out a survey and two focus groups in a tertiary hospital. In the survey, we assessed doctors' agreement, subjective adherence and perception of usefulness of 134 recommendations to reduce low-value practices from local and international initiatives. We also identified low-value practices possibly present in the hospital. In the focus groups with professionals from surgical and medical fields, using a phenomenological approach, we identified additional low-value practices, barriers and facilitators to reduce them.

RESULTS

169 doctors of 25 specialties participated (response rate: 7%-100%). Overall agreement with recommendations, subjective adherence and usefulness were 83%, 90% and 70%, respectively. Low-value practices form 22 recommendations (16%) were considered as possibly present in the hospital. In the focus groups, the professionals identified seven more. Defensive medicine and scepticism due to contradictory evidence were the main barriers. Facilitators included good leadership and coordination between professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

High agreement with recommendations to reduce low-value practices and high perception of usefulness reflect great awareness of low-value care in the hospital. However, there are several barriers to reduce them. Interventions to reduce low-value practices should foster confidence in decision-making processes between professionals and patients and provide trusted evidence.

Physician attitudes about cost consciousness for breast cancer treatment: differences by cancer sub-specialty

PURPOSE

High costs of cancer care place considerable burden on patients and society. Despite increasing recognition that providers should play a role in reducing care costs, how physicians across cancer specialties differ in their cost-consciousness has not been reported. We examined cost-consciousness regarding breast cancer care among medical oncologists, surgeons, and radiation oncologists.

METHODS

We identified 514 cancer surgeons, 504 medical oncologists, and 251 radiation oncologists by patient report through the iCanCare study. iCanCare identified newly diagnosed women with breast cancer through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries of Georgia and Los Angeles. We queried providers on three dimensions of cost-consciousness: (1) perceived importance of cost saving for society, patients, practice, and payers; (2) awareness of patient out-of-pocket expenses; and (3) discussion of financial burden.

RESULTS

We received responses from 376 surgeons (73%), 304 medical oncologists (60%), and 169 radiation oncologists (67%). Overall levels of cost-consciousness were moderate, with scores ranging from 2.5 to 3.0 out of 5. After adjusting for covariates, surgeons had the lowest scores on all three cost-consciousness measures; medical oncologists had the highest scores. Pairwise contrasts showed surgeons had significantly lower scores than medical oncologists for all three measures and significantly lower scores than radiation oncologists for two of the three cost-consciousness variables: importance of cost saving and discussion of financial burden.

CONCLUSIONS

How cost-consciousness impacts medical decision-making across specialty and how policy, structural, and behavioral interventions might sensitize providers regarding cost-related matters merit further examination.

Choosing Wisely, another way to spread blood transfusion's good practices

Medical practice should be as much as possible ruled by evidence-based medicine. A lot of experts contribute to that, in heavy structured procedures where they write detailed and precise clinical practice recommendations. Such documents are essential but they are often far from everyday questions patients and their general practitioners are asking. There is room for a more concise and practical approach and that is "Choosing Wisely". This approach asks every medical society to identify "things physicians and patients should question" and provide clear and proven replies. In doing so, it is expected a reduction of overused exams, treatments, or procedures which are not helpful for patients. "Better treated with less" is the global idea. A lot of countries are now going down that road, including France who plans to develop it. Several of them have blood transfusion societies which have already published their recommendations, and also first studies on their impact on the ground. Comparison of these works shows clearly that priorities are nearly the same everywhere.