Literature DB >> 25437728

Genetic screening and testing in an episode-based payment model: preserving patient autonomy.

Sharon Sutherland1, Ruth M Farrell, Charles Lockwood.   

Abstract

The State of Ohio is implementing an episode-based payment model for perinatal care. All costs of care will be tabulated for each live birth and assigned to the delivering provider, creating a three-tiered model for reimbursement for care. Providers will be reimbursed as usual for care that is average in cost and quality, while instituting rewards or penalties for those outside the expected range in either domain. There are few exclusions, and all methods of genetic screening and diagnostic testing are included in the episode cost calculation as proposed. Prenatal ultrasonography, genetic screening, and diagnostic testing are critical components of the delivery of high-quality, evidence-based prenatal care. These tests provide pregnant women with key information about the pregnancy, which, in turn, allows them to work closely with their health care provider to determine optimal prenatal care. The concepts of informed consent and decision-making, cornerstones of the ethical practice of medicine, are founded on the principles of autonomy and respect for persons. These principles recognize that patients' rights to make choices and take actions are based on their personal beliefs and values. Given the personal nature of such decisions, it is critical that patients have unbarred access to prenatal genetic tests if they elect to use them as part of their prenatal care. The proposed restructuring of reimbursement creates a clear conflict between patient autonomy and physician financial incentives.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25437728     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000471

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  4 in total

1.  Financing and Reimbursement Models for Personalised Medicine: A Systematic Review to Identify Current Models and Future Options.

Authors:  Rositsa Koleva-Kolarova; James Buchanan; Heleen Vellekoop; Simone Huygens; Matthijs Versteegh; Maureen Rutten-van Mölken; László Szilberhorn; Tamás Zelei; Balázs Nagy; Sarah Wordsworth; Apostolos Tsiachristas
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Considering medical risk information and communicating values: A mixed-method study of women's choice in prenatal testing.

Authors:  An Chen; Henni Tenhunen; Paulus Torkki; Seppo Heinonen; Paul Lillrank; Vedran Stefanovic
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  The impact of the emergence of COVID-19 on women's prenatal genetic testing decisions.

Authors:  Ruth M Farrell; Madelyn Pierce; Christina Collart; Caitlin Craighead; Marissa Coleridge; Edward K Chien; Uma Perni; Richard Frankel; Angela Ranzini; Brownsyne Tucker Edmonds; Susannah S Rose
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 3.242

4.  Facilitating autonomous, confident and satisfying choices: a mixed-method study of women's choice-making in prenatal screening for common aneuploidies.

Authors:  An Chen; Henni Tenhunen; Paulus Torkki; Antti Peltokorpi; Seppo Heinonen; Paul Lillrank; Vedran Stefanovic
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 3.007

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.