Taking societal cost into clinical consideration

U.S. physicians’ views

Alissa R. Stavig, Hyo Jung Tak, John D. Yoon, Farr A. Curlin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Recent campaigns (e.g., the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation’s Choosing Wisely) reflect the increasing role that physicians are expected to have in stewarding health care resources. We examine whether physicians believe they should pay attention to societal costs or refuse requests for costly interventions with little chance of patient benefit. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a 2010 national survey of 2016 U.S. physicians sampled from the AMA Physician Masterfile. Criterion measures were agreement or disagreement with two survey items related to costs of care. We also examined whether physicians’ practice and religious characteristics were associated with their responses. Results: The adjusted response rate was 62% (1156/1878). Forty-seven percent of physicians agreed that physicians “should not consider the societal cost of medical care when caring for individual patients,” whereas 69% agreed that physicians “should refuse requests from patients or their families for costly interventions that have little chance of benefitting the patient.” Physicians in specialties that care for patients at the end of life were more supportive of refusing such costly interventions. We did not find consistent associations between physicians’ religiosity and their responses to these items, though those least supportive of taking into account societal cost were disproportionately from Christian affiliations. Conclusion: Physicians were nearly evenly divided regarding whether they should help control societal costs when caring for individual patients, but a strong majority agreed that physicians should refuse costly interventions that have little chance of benefit.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)173-180
Number of pages8
JournalAJOB Empirical Bioethics
Volume9
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 3 2018

Fingerprint

physician
Physicians
Costs and Cost Analysis
costs
Costs
Physician's Role
Cost Control
Health Resources
Internal Medicine
secondary analysis
Health Care Costs
medical care
Patient Care
campaign
Delivery of Health Care
medicine
health care
resources

Keywords

  • national survey
  • Rationing
  • religion
  • societal costs

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Philosophy
  • Health Policy

Cite this

Taking societal cost into clinical consideration : U.S. physicians’ views. / Stavig, Alissa R.; Tak, Hyo Jung; Yoon, John D.; Curlin, Farr A.

In: AJOB Empirical Bioethics, Vol. 9, No. 3, 03.07.2018, p. 173-180.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stavig, Alissa R. ; Tak, Hyo Jung ; Yoon, John D. ; Curlin, Farr A. / Taking societal cost into clinical consideration : U.S. physicians’ views. In: AJOB Empirical Bioethics. 2018 ; Vol. 9, No. 3. pp. 173-180.
@article{fe04382893d04fce9e1d4d03a8229ca2,
title = "Taking societal cost into clinical consideration: U.S. physicians’ views",
abstract = "Background: Recent campaigns (e.g., the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation’s Choosing Wisely) reflect the increasing role that physicians are expected to have in stewarding health care resources. We examine whether physicians believe they should pay attention to societal costs or refuse requests for costly interventions with little chance of patient benefit. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a 2010 national survey of 2016 U.S. physicians sampled from the AMA Physician Masterfile. Criterion measures were agreement or disagreement with two survey items related to costs of care. We also examined whether physicians’ practice and religious characteristics were associated with their responses. Results: The adjusted response rate was 62{\%} (1156/1878). Forty-seven percent of physicians agreed that physicians “should not consider the societal cost of medical care when caring for individual patients,” whereas 69{\%} agreed that physicians “should refuse requests from patients or their families for costly interventions that have little chance of benefitting the patient.” Physicians in specialties that care for patients at the end of life were more supportive of refusing such costly interventions. We did not find consistent associations between physicians’ religiosity and their responses to these items, though those least supportive of taking into account societal cost were disproportionately from Christian affiliations. Conclusion: Physicians were nearly evenly divided regarding whether they should help control societal costs when caring for individual patients, but a strong majority agreed that physicians should refuse costly interventions that have little chance of benefit.",
keywords = "national survey, Rationing, religion, societal costs",
author = "Stavig, {Alissa R.} and Tak, {Hyo Jung} and Yoon, {John D.} and Curlin, {Farr A.}",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/23294515.2018.1498408",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "173--180",
journal = "AJOB Empirical Bioethics",
issn = "2329-4515",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Taking societal cost into clinical consideration

T2 - U.S. physicians’ views

AU - Stavig, Alissa R.

AU - Tak, Hyo Jung

AU - Yoon, John D.

AU - Curlin, Farr A.

PY - 2018/7/3

Y1 - 2018/7/3

N2 - Background: Recent campaigns (e.g., the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation’s Choosing Wisely) reflect the increasing role that physicians are expected to have in stewarding health care resources. We examine whether physicians believe they should pay attention to societal costs or refuse requests for costly interventions with little chance of patient benefit. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a 2010 national survey of 2016 U.S. physicians sampled from the AMA Physician Masterfile. Criterion measures were agreement or disagreement with two survey items related to costs of care. We also examined whether physicians’ practice and religious characteristics were associated with their responses. Results: The adjusted response rate was 62% (1156/1878). Forty-seven percent of physicians agreed that physicians “should not consider the societal cost of medical care when caring for individual patients,” whereas 69% agreed that physicians “should refuse requests from patients or their families for costly interventions that have little chance of benefitting the patient.” Physicians in specialties that care for patients at the end of life were more supportive of refusing such costly interventions. We did not find consistent associations between physicians’ religiosity and their responses to these items, though those least supportive of taking into account societal cost were disproportionately from Christian affiliations. Conclusion: Physicians were nearly evenly divided regarding whether they should help control societal costs when caring for individual patients, but a strong majority agreed that physicians should refuse costly interventions that have little chance of benefit.

AB - Background: Recent campaigns (e.g., the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation’s Choosing Wisely) reflect the increasing role that physicians are expected to have in stewarding health care resources. We examine whether physicians believe they should pay attention to societal costs or refuse requests for costly interventions with little chance of patient benefit. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a 2010 national survey of 2016 U.S. physicians sampled from the AMA Physician Masterfile. Criterion measures were agreement or disagreement with two survey items related to costs of care. We also examined whether physicians’ practice and religious characteristics were associated with their responses. Results: The adjusted response rate was 62% (1156/1878). Forty-seven percent of physicians agreed that physicians “should not consider the societal cost of medical care when caring for individual patients,” whereas 69% agreed that physicians “should refuse requests from patients or their families for costly interventions that have little chance of benefitting the patient.” Physicians in specialties that care for patients at the end of life were more supportive of refusing such costly interventions. We did not find consistent associations between physicians’ religiosity and their responses to these items, though those least supportive of taking into account societal cost were disproportionately from Christian affiliations. Conclusion: Physicians were nearly evenly divided regarding whether they should help control societal costs when caring for individual patients, but a strong majority agreed that physicians should refuse costly interventions that have little chance of benefit.

KW - national survey

KW - Rationing

KW - religion

KW - societal costs

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056425569&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85056425569&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/23294515.2018.1498408

DO - 10.1080/23294515.2018.1498408

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 173

EP - 180

JO - AJOB Empirical Bioethics

JF - AJOB Empirical Bioethics

SN - 2329-4515

IS - 3

ER -