Mitesh S Patel1, Kevin G Volpp2, Dylan S Small3, Craig Wynn4, Jingsan Zhu5, Lin Yang4, Steven Honeywell4, Susan C Day4. 1. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Electronic address: mpatel@upenn.edu. 2. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 3. The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 4. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 5. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High value screening tests such as colonoscopy and mammography can improve early cancer detection but are often underutilized. METHODS: We evaluated an active choice intervention using the electronic health record (EHR) to confirm patient eligibility for colonoscopy or mammography during the patient's clinic visit and prompt the physician and his/her medical assistant to actively choose to "accept" or "cancel" an order for it. We fit multivariate logistic regression models using a difference-in-differences approach to evaluate changes in physician ordering and patient completion of colonoscopy and mammography at the intervention practice compared to two control practices, adjusting for time trends, patient and clinic visit characteristics. RESULTS: The sample comprised 7560 patients due for colonoscopy and 8337 patients due for mammography. Pre-intervention trends between practices did not differ. In the adjusted models, compared to the control group over time, the intervention practice had a significant increase in ordering of colonoscopy (11.8% points, 95% CI: 8.0-15.6, P<0.001) and mammography (12.4% points, 95% CI: 8.7-16.2, P<0.001). There was a significant increase in patient completion of colonoscopy (3.5% points, 95% CI: 1.1-5.9, P<0.01), but no change in mammography (2.2% points, 95% CI: -1.0 to 5.5, P=0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Active choice through the EHR was associated with an increase in physician ordering of colonoscopy and mammography. The intervention was also associated with an increase in patient completion of colonoscopy but no change in patient completion of mammography. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: High value screening tests such as colonoscopy and mammography can improve early cancer detection but are often underutilized. METHODS: We evaluated an active choice intervention using the electronic health record (EHR) to confirm patient eligibility for colonoscopy or mammography during the patient's clinic visit and prompt the physician and his/her medical assistant to actively choose to "accept" or "cancel" an order for it. We fit multivariate logistic regression models using a difference-in-differences approach to evaluate changes in physician ordering and patient completion of colonoscopy and mammography at the intervention practice compared to two control practices, adjusting for time trends, patient and clinic visit characteristics. RESULTS: The sample comprised 7560 patients due for colonoscopy and 8337 patients due for mammography. Pre-intervention trends between practices did not differ. In the adjusted models, compared to the control group over time, the intervention practice had a significant increase in ordering of colonoscopy (11.8% points, 95% CI: 8.0-15.6, P<0.001) and mammography (12.4% points, 95% CI: 8.7-16.2, P<0.001). There was a significant increase in patient completion of colonoscopy (3.5% points, 95% CI: 1.1-5.9, P<0.01), but no change in mammography (2.2% points, 95% CI: -1.0 to 5.5, P=0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Active choice through the EHR was associated with an increase in physician ordering of colonoscopy and mammography. The intervention was also associated with an increase in patient completion of colonoscopy but no change in patient completion of mammography. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Active choice; Behavioral economics; Cancer screening; Choice architecture; Colonoscopy; Electronic health record; Mammography; Physician behavior
Authors: Reinier G S Meester; Chyke A Doubeni; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; S Lucas Goede; Theodore R Levin; Virginia P Quinn; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Douglas A Corley; Ann G Zauber Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Anthony J Avery; Boki S P Savelyich; Aziz Sheikh; Judy Cantrill; Caroline J Morris; Bernard Fernando; Mike Bainbridge; Pete Horsfield; Sheila Teasdale Journal: Inform Prim Care Date: 2005
Authors: Mitesh S Patel; Neha Patel; Dylan S Small; Roy Rosin; Jeffrey I Rohrbach; Nathaniel Stromberg; C William Hanson; David A Asch Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-03-25 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Beverly B Green; Ching-Yun Wang; Melissa L Anderson; Jessica Chubak; Richard T Meenan; Sally W Vernon; Sharon Fuller Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2013-03-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Leland E Hull; Jason L Vassy; Annjanette Stone; Catherine C Chanfreau-Coffinier; Craig W Heise; Victoria M Pratt; Ronald Przygodzki; Corrine I Voils; Deepak Voora; Jessica Wang-Rodriguez; Steven A Schichman; Maren T Scheuner Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Mitesh S Patel; Kevin G Volpp; Dylan S Small; Craig Wynne; Jingsan Zhu; Lin Yang; Steven Honeywell; Susan C Day Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-03-23 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Hayley M Belli; Sara K Chokshi; Roshini Hegde; Andrea B Troxel; Saul Blecker; Paul A Testa; Judd Anderman; Christina Wong; Devin M Mann Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Matthew M Loiacono; Nicholas Mitsakakis; Jeffrey C Kwong; Gabriela B Gomez; Ayman Chit; Paul Grootendorst Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-06-01
Authors: Esther Y Hsiang; Shivan J Mehta; Dylan S Small; Charles A L Rareshide; Christopher K Snider; Susan C Day; Mitesh S Patel Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-05-03
Authors: Mitesh S Patel; Gregory W Kurtzman; Sneha Kannan; Dylan S Small; Alexander Morris; Steve Honeywell; Damien Leri; Charles A L Rareshide; Susan C Day; Kevin B Mahoney; Kevin G Volpp; David A Asch Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-07-06
Authors: Rebecca H Kim; Susan C Day; Dylan S Small; Christopher K Snider; Charles A L Rareshide; Mitesh S Patel Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-09-07