Craig Evan Pollack1, Giridhar Mallya, Daniel Polsky. 1. The Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. craige@mail.med.upenn.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Consumer-directed health plans are increasingly common, yet little is known about their impact on physician decision-making and preventive service use. OBJECTIVE: To determine how patients' deductible levels and socioeconomic status may affect primary care physicians' recommendations for colorectal cancer screening. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Screening recommendations were elicited using hypothetical vignettes from a national sample of 1,500 primary care physicians. Physicians were randomized to one of four vignettes describing a patient with either low or high socioeconomic status (SES) and either low- or high-deductible plan. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to examine how recommendations varied as a function of SES and deductible. OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of recommendation for home fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and inappropriate screening, defined as no screening or office-based fecal occult blood testing. RESULTS:A total of 528 (49%) eligible physicians responded. Overall, 7.2% of physicians recommended inappropriate screening; 3.2% of patients with high SES in low-deductible plans received inappropriate screening recommendations and 11.4% of patients with low SES in high-deductible plans for an adjusted odds ratio of 0.22 (0.05-0.89). The odds of a colonoscopy recommendation were over ten times higher (AOR 11.46, 5.26-24.94) for patients with high SES in low-deductible plans compared to patients with low SES in high-deductible plans. Funds in medical savings accounts eliminated differences in inappropriate screening recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Patient SES and deductible-level affect physician recommendations for preventive care. Coverage of preventive services and funds in medical savings accounts may help to mitigate the impact of high-deductibles and SES on inappropriate recommendations.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Consumer-directed health plans are increasingly common, yet little is known about their impact on physician decision-making and preventive service use. OBJECTIVE: To determine how patients' deductible levels and socioeconomic status may affect primary care physicians' recommendations for colorectal cancer screening. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Screening recommendations were elicited using hypothetical vignettes from a national sample of 1,500 primary care physicians. Physicians were randomized to one of four vignettes describing a patient with either low or high socioeconomic status (SES) and either low- or high-deductible plan. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to examine how recommendations varied as a function of SES and deductible. OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of recommendation for home fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and inappropriate screening, defined as no screening or office-based fecal occult blood testing. RESULTS: A total of 528 (49%) eligible physicians responded. Overall, 7.2% of physicians recommended inappropriate screening; 3.2% of patients with high SES in low-deductible plans received inappropriate screening recommendations and 11.4% of patients with low SES in high-deductible plans for an adjusted odds ratio of 0.22 (0.05-0.89). The odds of a colonoscopy recommendation were over ten times higher (AOR 11.46, 5.26-24.94) for patients with high SES in low-deductible plans compared to patients with low SES in high-deductible plans. Funds in medical savings accounts eliminated differences in inappropriate screening recommendations. CONCLUSIONS:Patient SES and deductible-level affect physician recommendations for preventive care. Coverage of preventive services and funds in medical savings accounts may help to mitigate the impact of high-deductibles and SES on inappropriate recommendations.
Authors: Carrie N Klabunde; Paul S Frame; Ann Meadow; Elizabeth Jones; Marion Nadel; Sally W Vernon Journal: Prev Med Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Marion R Nadel; Jean A Shapiro; Carrie N Klabunde; Laura C Seeff; Robert Uhler; Robert A Smith; David F Ransohoff Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2005-01-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: G Caleb Alexander; Lawrence P Casalino; Chien-Wen Tseng; Diane McFadden; David O Meltzer Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Usha Menon; Rhonda Belue; Stéphanie Wahab; Kathryn Rugen; Anita Y Kinney; Peter Maramaldi; Debra Wujcik; Laura A Szalacha Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2011-12
Authors: Kira L Ryskina; Eric S Holmboe; Elizabeth Bernabeo; Rachel M Werner; Judy A Shea; Judith A Long Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Michael Joynt; Meghan K Train; Brett W Robbins; Jill S Halterman; Enrico Caiola; Robert J Fortuna Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 5.128