BACKGROUND: While studies have been published in the last 30 years that examine the effect of charge display during physician decision-making, no analysis or synthesis of these studies has been conducted. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the type and quality of charge display studies that have been published; to synthesize this information in the form of a literature review. METHODS: English-language articles published between 1982 and 2013 were identified using MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, ABI-Inform, and Academic Search Premier. Article titles, abstracts, and text were reviewed for relevancy by two authors. Data were then extracted and subsequently synthesized and analyzed. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were identified that fell into two topic categories: the effect of charge display on radiology and laboratory test ordering versus on medication choice. Seven articles were randomized controlled trials, eight were pre-intervention vs. post-intervention studies, and two interventions had a concurrent control and intervention groups, but were not randomized. Twelve studies were conducted in a clinical environment, whereas five were survey studies. Of the nine clinically based interventions that examined test ordering, seven had statistically significant reductions in cost and/or the number of tests ordered. Two of the three clinical studies looking at medication expenditures found significant reductions in cost. In the survey studies, physicians consistently chose fewer tests or lower cost options in the theoretical scenarios presented. CONCLUSIONS: In the majority of studies, charge information changed ordering and prescribing behavior.
BACKGROUND: While studies have been published in the last 30 years that examine the effect of charge display during physician decision-making, no analysis or synthesis of these studies has been conducted. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the type and quality of charge display studies that have been published; to synthesize this information in the form of a literature review. METHODS: English-language articles published between 1982 and 2013 were identified using MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, ABI-Inform, and Academic Search Premier. Article titles, abstracts, and text were reviewed for relevancy by two authors. Data were then extracted and subsequently synthesized and analyzed. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were identified that fell into two topic categories: the effect of charge display on radiology and laboratory test ordering versus on medication choice. Seven articles were randomized controlled trials, eight were pre-intervention vs. post-intervention studies, and two interventions had a concurrent control and intervention groups, but were not randomized. Twelve studies were conducted in a clinical environment, whereas five were survey studies. Of the nine clinically based interventions that examined test ordering, seven had statistically significant reductions in cost and/or the number of tests ordered. Two of the three clinical studies looking at medication expenditures found significant reductions in cost. In the survey studies, physicians consistently chose fewer tests or lower cost options in the theoretical scenarios presented. CONCLUSIONS: In the majority of studies, charge information changed ordering and prescribing behavior.
Authors: Philippe Seguin; Jean Paul Bleichner; Jacques Grolier; Yves Marie Guillou; Yannick Mallédant Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2002-02-09 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Leonard S Feldman; Hasan M Shihab; David Thiemann; Hsin-Chieh Yeh; Margaret Ardolino; Steven Mandell; Daniel J Brotman Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-05-27 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Mark T Silvestri; Xiao Xu; Theodore Long; Tasce Bongiovanni; Steven L Bernstein; Sarwat I Chaudhry; Julia I Silvestri; Marilyn Stolar; Erich J Greene; James D Dziura; Cary P Gross; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-05-29 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Mina S Sedrak; Jennifer S Myers; Dylan S Small; Irving Nachamkin; Justin B Ziemba; Dana Murray; Gregory W Kurtzman; Jingsan Zhu; Wenli Wang; Deborah Mincarelli; Daniel Danoski; Brian P Wells; Jeffrey S Berns; Patrick J Brennan; C William Hanson; C Jessica Dine; Mitesh S Patel Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Katherine H Schiavoni; Lisa Soleymani Lehmann; Wendy Guan; Meredith Rosenthal; Thomas D Sequist; Alyna T Chien Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 5.128