Literature DB >> 27913910

A Randomized Trial of Displaying Paid Price Information on Imaging Study and Procedure Ordering Rates.

Alyna T Chien1,2, Lisa Soleymani Lehmann3,4,5,6, Laura A Hatfield7, Kate E Koplan8, Carter R Petty9, Anna D Sinaiko4, Meredith B Rosenthal4, Thomas D Sequist5,6,10.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated how price transparency lowers the test-ordering rates of trainees in hospitals, and physician-targeted price transparency efforts have been viewed as a promising cost-controlling strategy.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of displaying paid-price information on test-ordering rates for common imaging studies and procedures within an accountable care organization (ACO).
DESIGN: Block randomized controlled trial for 1 year.
SUBJECTS: A total of 1205 fully licensed clinicians (728 primary care, 477 specialists). INTERVENTION: Starting January 2014, clinicians in the Control arm received no price display; those in the intervention arms received Single or Paired Internal/External Median Prices in the test-ordering screen of their electronic health record. Internal prices were the amounts paid by insurers for the ACO's services; external paid prices were the amounts paid by insurers for the same services when delivered by unaffiliated providers. MAIN MEASURES: Ordering rates (orders per 100 face-to-face encounters with adult patients): overall, designated to be completed internally within the ACO, considered "inappropriate" (e.g., MRI for simple headache), and thought to be "appropriate" (e.g., screening colonoscopy). KEY
RESULTS: We found no significant difference in overall ordering rates across the Control, Single Median Price, or Paired Internal/External Median Prices study arms. For every 100 encounters, clinicians in the Control arm ordered 15.0 (SD 31.1) tests, those in the Single Median Price arm ordered 15.0 (SD 16.2) tests, and those in the Paired Prices arms ordered 15.7 (SD 20.5) tests (one-way ANOVA p-value 0.88). There was no difference in ordering rates for tests designated to be completed internally or considered to be inappropriate or appropriate.
CONCLUSIONS: Displaying paid-price information did not alter how frequently primary care and specialist clinicians ordered imaging studies and procedures within an ACO. Those with a particular interest in removing waste from the health care system may want to consider a variety of contextual factors that can affect physician-targeted price transparency.

Entities:  

Keywords:  electronic health record; health services research; randomized trials

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27913910      PMCID: PMC5377881          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-016-3917-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  36 in total

1.  Modifying the request behaviour of clinicians.

Authors:  R Gama; P G Nightingale; P M Broughton; M Peters; J G Ratcliffe; G V Bradby; J Berg
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Increased price transparency in health care--challenges and potential effects.

Authors:  Anna D Sinaiko; Meredith B Rosenthal
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-03-10       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Provider cost transparency alone has no impact on inpatient imaging utilization.

Authors:  Daniel J Durand; Leonard S Feldman; Jonathan S Lewin; Daniel J Brotman
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 5.532

4.  Use of laboratory tests and pharmaceuticals. Variation among physicians and effect of cost audit on subsequent use.

Authors:  S A Schroeder; K Kenders; J K Cooper; T E Piemme
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1973-08-20       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Feedback reduces test use in a health maintenance organization.

Authors:  D M Berwick; K L Coltin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1986-03-21       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 6.  Effects of availability of patient-related charges on practice patterns and cost containment in the pediatric intensive care unit.

Authors:  R C Sachdeva; L S Jefferson; J Coss-Bu; G Done; D Campbell; S I Nelson; R D Feigin
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 7.598

7.  The effect on test ordering of informing physicians of the charges for outpatient diagnostic tests.

Authors:  W M Tierney; M E Miller; C J McDonald
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1990-05-24       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Effect of cost education, cost audits, and faculty chart review on the use of laboratory services.

Authors:  G D Everett; C S deBlois; P F Chang; T Holets
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1983-05

9.  Physician performance and racial disparities in diabetes mellitus care.

Authors:  Thomas D Sequist; Garrett M Fitzmaurice; Richard Marshall; Shimon Shaykevich; Dana Gelb Safran; John Z Ayanian
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-06-09

10.  Quality monitoring of physicians: linking patients' experiences of care to clinical quality and outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas D Sequist; Eric C Schneider; Michael Anastario; Esosa G Odigie; Richard Marshall; William H Rogers; Dana Gelb Safran
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-08-28       Impact factor: 5.128

View more
  10 in total

1.  Capsule Commentary on Chien et al., A Randomized Trial of Displaying Paid Price Information on Imaging Study and Procedure Ordering Rates.

Authors:  Zhen Wang
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Impact of Cost Display on Ordering Patterns for Hospital Laboratory and Imaging Services.

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

3.  Application of Unit-Level Cost Transparency, Education, Enhanced Audit, and Feedback of Anonymized Peer Ranking to Promote Judicious Use of 25% Albumin in Critical Care Units.

Authors:  Chiedozie I Udeh; Matthew Wanek; Belinda L Udeh; J Steven Hata
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2019-02-10

4.  The Impact of Choosing Wisely Interventions on Low-Value Medical Services: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Betsy Q Cliff; Anton L V Avanceña; Richard A Hirth; Shoou-Yih Daniel Lee
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2021-08-17       Impact factor: 4.911

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

Authors:  Sunita M Desai; Alan Z Chen; Jiejie Wang; Wei-Yi Chung; Jay Stadelman; Chris Mahoney; Adam Szerencsy; Lisa Anzisi; Ateev Mehrotra; Leora I Horwitz
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 44.409

6.  Revisiting Indications for Brain Imaging During the Clinical Staging Evaluation of Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Matthew D Pichert; Maureen E Canavan; Richard C Maduka; Andrew X Li; Theresa Ermer; Peter L Zhan; Michael Kaminski; Brooks V Udelsman; Justin D Blasberg; Vincent J Mase; Andrew P Dhanasopon; Daniel J Boffa
Journal:  JTO Clin Res Rep       Date:  2022-04-06

7.  Effect of a Price Transparency Intervention in the Electronic Health Record on Clinician Ordering of Inpatient Laboratory Tests: The PRICE Randomized Clinical Trial.

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

Review 8.  The effects of on-screen, point of care computer reminders on processes and outcomes of care.

Authors:  Kaveh G Shojania; Alison Jennings; Alain Mayhew; Craig R Ramsay; Martin P Eccles; Jeremy Grimshaw
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-07-08

9.  Engagement in Eliminating Overuse: The Argument for Safety and Beyond.

Authors:  Sara Pasik; Deborah Korenstein; Sigal Israilov; Hyung J Cho
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 2.243

10.  Effect of a price display intervention on laboratory test ordering behavior of general practitioners.

Authors:  Dennis M J Muris; Max Molenaers; Trang Nguyen; Paul W M P Bergmans; Bernadette A C van Acker; Mariëlle M E Krekels; Jochen W L Cals
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 2.497

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.