Cargando…
Attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals
OBJECTIVE: To determine the attitudes of physicians and trainees in regard to the roles of both cost-effectiveness and equity in clinical decision making. DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, electronic surveys containing a hypothetical decision-making scenario were sent to medical professionals t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5642791/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28765138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017251 |
_version_ | 1783271429645533184 |
---|---|
author | Li, David G Wong, Gordon X Martin, David T Tybor, David J Kim, Jennifer Lasker, Jeffrey Mitty, Roger Salem, Deeb |
author_facet | Li, David G Wong, Gordon X Martin, David T Tybor, David J Kim, Jennifer Lasker, Jeffrey Mitty, Roger Salem, Deeb |
author_sort | Li, David G |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To determine the attitudes of physicians and trainees in regard to the roles of both cost-effectiveness and equity in clinical decision making. DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, electronic surveys containing a hypothetical decision-making scenario were sent to medical professionals to select between two colon cancer screening tests for a population. SETTING: Three Greater Boston academic medical institutions: Tufts University School of Medicine, Tufts Medical Centre and Lahey Hospital and Medical Centre. PARTICIPANTS: 819 medical students, 497 residents-in-training and 671 practising physicians were contacted electronically using institutional and organisational directories. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): Stratified opinions of medical providers and trainee subgroups regarding cost-effectiveness and equity. RESULTS: A total of 881 respondents comprising 512 medical students, 133 medical residents-in-training and 236 practising physicians completed the survey (total response rate 44.3%). Thirty-six per cent of medical students, 44% of residents-in-training and 53% of practising physicians favoured the less effective and more equitable screening test. Residents-in-training (OR 1.49, CI 1.01 to 2.21; p=0.044) and practising physicians (OR 2.12, CI 1.54 to 2.92; p<0.001) were more likely to favour the equitable option compared with medical students. Moreover, female responders across all three cohorts favoured the more equitable screening test to a greater degree than did male responders (OR 1.70, CI 1.29 to 2.24; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness analysis does not accurately reflect the importance that medical professionals place on equity. Among medical professionals, practising physicians appear to be more egalitarian than residents-in-training, while medical students appear to be most utilitarian and cost-effective. Meanwhile, female respondents in all three cohorts favoured the more equitable option to a greater degree than their male counterparts. Healthcare policies that trade off equity in favour of cost-effectiveness may be unacceptable to many medical professionals, especially practising physicians and women. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5642791 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56427912017-10-25 Attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals Li, David G Wong, Gordon X Martin, David T Tybor, David J Kim, Jennifer Lasker, Jeffrey Mitty, Roger Salem, Deeb BMJ Open Ethics OBJECTIVE: To determine the attitudes of physicians and trainees in regard to the roles of both cost-effectiveness and equity in clinical decision making. DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, electronic surveys containing a hypothetical decision-making scenario were sent to medical professionals to select between two colon cancer screening tests for a population. SETTING: Three Greater Boston academic medical institutions: Tufts University School of Medicine, Tufts Medical Centre and Lahey Hospital and Medical Centre. PARTICIPANTS: 819 medical students, 497 residents-in-training and 671 practising physicians were contacted electronically using institutional and organisational directories. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): Stratified opinions of medical providers and trainee subgroups regarding cost-effectiveness and equity. RESULTS: A total of 881 respondents comprising 512 medical students, 133 medical residents-in-training and 236 practising physicians completed the survey (total response rate 44.3%). Thirty-six per cent of medical students, 44% of residents-in-training and 53% of practising physicians favoured the less effective and more equitable screening test. Residents-in-training (OR 1.49, CI 1.01 to 2.21; p=0.044) and practising physicians (OR 2.12, CI 1.54 to 2.92; p<0.001) were more likely to favour the equitable option compared with medical students. Moreover, female responders across all three cohorts favoured the more equitable screening test to a greater degree than did male responders (OR 1.70, CI 1.29 to 2.24; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness analysis does not accurately reflect the importance that medical professionals place on equity. Among medical professionals, practising physicians appear to be more egalitarian than residents-in-training, while medical students appear to be most utilitarian and cost-effective. Meanwhile, female respondents in all three cohorts favoured the more equitable option to a greater degree than their male counterparts. Healthcare policies that trade off equity in favour of cost-effectiveness may be unacceptable to many medical professionals, especially practising physicians and women. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-08-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5642791/ /pubmed/28765138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017251 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Ethics Li, David G Wong, Gordon X Martin, David T Tybor, David J Kim, Jennifer Lasker, Jeffrey Mitty, Roger Salem, Deeb Attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals |
title | Attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals |
title_full | Attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals |
title_fullStr | Attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals |
title_full_unstemmed | Attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals |
title_short | Attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals |
title_sort | attitudes on cost-effectiveness and equity: a cross-sectional study examining the viewpoints of medical professionals |
topic | Ethics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5642791/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28765138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017251 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lidavidg attitudesoncosteffectivenessandequityacrosssectionalstudyexaminingtheviewpointsofmedicalprofessionals AT wonggordonx attitudesoncosteffectivenessandequityacrosssectionalstudyexaminingtheviewpointsofmedicalprofessionals AT martindavidt attitudesoncosteffectivenessandequityacrosssectionalstudyexaminingtheviewpointsofmedicalprofessionals AT tybordavidj attitudesoncosteffectivenessandequityacrosssectionalstudyexaminingtheviewpointsofmedicalprofessionals AT kimjennifer attitudesoncosteffectivenessandequityacrosssectionalstudyexaminingtheviewpointsofmedicalprofessionals AT laskerjeffrey attitudesoncosteffectivenessandequityacrosssectionalstudyexaminingtheviewpointsofmedicalprofessionals AT mittyroger attitudesoncosteffectivenessandequityacrosssectionalstudyexaminingtheviewpointsofmedicalprofessionals AT salemdeeb attitudesoncosteffectivenessandequityacrosssectionalstudyexaminingtheviewpointsofmedicalprofessionals |