Error message

The page you requested does not exist. For your convenience, a search was performed using the query news events press coverage 2014 02 14.

Page not found

You are here

Tue, December 04, 2018

Patient failure to disclose medically relevant information to clinicians can undermine patient care or even lead to patient harm. A recent survey study examined the frequency of patients failing to disclose to their clinicians information that is relevant to their care and their reasons for doing so. Researchers found that many respondents intentionally withhold important information from their clinicians and were most likely to do so when they disagreed with or misunderstood their clinician’s instructions.

Current and former CBSSM-affiliated faculty and staff were co-authors of this study.

Fri, July 26, 2013

Susan Goold is the senior author in a newly published study in JAMA, in which 2,500 U. S. physicians were asked about their views on 17 specific strategies to reduce health care spending, including proposed policies in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. They were also surveyed on their perceived roles and responsibilities in addressing health care costs as care providers.

The vast majority of U.S. physicians (85 percent) agreed that trying to contain costs was a responsibility of every physician but most respondents prioritized patients’ best interests over cost concerns. Most surveyed physicians supported cost-containment initiatives aimed at improving the quality and efficiency of care, such as promoting chronic disease care coordination and limiting corporate influence on physician behavior. Substantial financing reforms, however, were much less popular among physicians. Examples include bundled payments, penalties for readmissions, eliminating fee-for-service reimbursement and other Medicare pay cuts. Physicians also believed that patients, pharmaceutical companies, and malpractice lawyers shared as much or more of the responsibility for containing escalating healthcare costs.

Jon C. Tilburt, M.D., M.P.H., of the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., was lead author of the study.

Tilburt JC, Wynia MK, Sheeler RD, Thorsteinsdottir B, James KM, Egginton JS, Liebow M, Hurst S, Danis M, Goold S (2013). Views of US Physicians About Controlling Health Care Costs. JAMA 310 (4): 380-388.

When Money is Tight (Jul-04)

Because of the high cost of many prescription drugs, some people take fewer pills than prescribed. What are the health implications?

Imagine that four months ago, you started getting chest pains whenever you exerted yourself physically, and at the time you decided this was serious enough to see a doctor. After your doctor examined you and ran some tests, you were told that you have angina, a kind of heart disease. This disease can develop when the coronary arteries become narrow and clogged from high cholesterol and the heart can't get the oxygen that it needs. Your doctor helped you plan some lifestyle changes to treat your condition. You have been very devoted to the new way of life, eating healthier and doing the proper kinds of exercise regularly. Also, part of your treatment involves regularly taking the medication that your doctor prescribed for you. You were told to take one pill each day.

The trouble is your prescription drug insurance is limited and you find yourself having to pay the majority of the cost for the angina medication out of pocket. What's more, you have been struggling just to break even every month after accounting for all of your living expenses. Now you are worried about being able to afford the medication if you take it as regularly as prescribed. A pill a day may be doctor's orders, but it is getting costly for you.
 
Would you take the pill as often as prescribed or would you skip some days to try to save money?
 
  • I would take the pill every day as prescribed.
  • I would skip some days to save some money.

How do your answers compare?

You have to save money somehow, right? Perhaps you would just have to cut back on other expenses in your life, but apparently you felt the medication had to be taken as prescribed. Research has found, however, that especially among the elderly, a significant portion of the population reports restricting medications due to cost. An important question is whether this leads to adverse health outcomes. Policy debates have been largely divided on this issue.

Do those who restrict their medications due to cost experience adverse health outcomes?

A research team led by Dr. Michele Heisler and Dr. Kenneth Langa conducted a study to investigate this question. Prior to this study, no one had examined this question by studying the same individuals at different points in time to see if those who restricted medication due to cost were more likely to develop adverse health outcomes. The researchers obtained nationally representative data that was the result of nearly 8000 interviews. Each respondent was interviewed in 1995 or 1996 and then re-interviewed in 1998. At both times, individuals were asked about cost-related medication restriction and about their health. The health questions assessed overall health, angina and other cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, arthritis, and depression.

The researchers found that cost-related medication restriction was associated with almost twice the odds of experiencing a significant decline in overall health. The association between restricting medication due to cost and poor health outcomes was strongest for those who had cardiovascular disease. Of these individuals, those who restricted their medication had a 50% increased odds of suffering angina and a 51% increased odds of having a stroke. Aren't you glad on the previous page you said you wouldn't restrict your angina medication?

Those who had arthritis or diabetes and restricted their medication due to cost did not report worse disease-related outcomes at the second interview. For arthritis, this might have been because of equally effective over-the-counter pain medications, and for diabetes, higher rates of kidney disease would likely require a longer period of follow-up to detect. When looking at age as a factor, the results showed that older adults experienced significant declines in overall health, worse cardiovascular outcomes, and increased depression. The study showed that younger people who restrict are also at risk for a decline in their health.

One limitation of this study is the lack of data about how often individuals restricted medications. If an individual restricted only once or twice, it is not clinically plausible that this would have led to an adverse health outcome. Also, the data on health outcomes were self-reported, and thus subject to bias. Previous studies, however, have shown excellent agreement between medical records and self-reports for conditions such as hypertension, diabetes, and stroke.

Implications on policy

This study provides evidence that, contrary to some claims, adults with chronic illnesses who restrict medications due to cost experience adverse health outcomes. As drug costs continue to escalate and individuals continue to lack full prescription coverage from their health insurance, it will be increasingly important for healthcare systems and physicians to develop strategies to screen patients for cost-related underuse of medications and to provide assistance to these patients. Moreover, insurance companies will need to create benefit packages that provide appropriate coverage, taking into account the cost of prescription medications.

For more information see:

Michele Heisler, Kenneth M. Langa, Elizabeth L. Eby, A. Mark Fendrick, Mohammed U. Kabeto, John D. Piette. The Health Effects of Restricting Prescription Medication Use Because of Cost. Medical Care, 42(7). 2004.

We are delighted to officially announce that Raymond De Vries will be joining Angie as the new Co-Director of the Center. Ray has been an active faculty member of CBSSM for several years.  He is a Professor in the Departments of Medical Education, Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Sociology, as well as a visiting Professor at Maastricht University in the Netherlands.  He is particularly interested in the regulation of science; clinical trials of genetic therapies and deep brain stimulation; international research ethics; and the social, ethical, and policy issues associated with maternity care.

Scott Kim recently stepped down from the Co-Directorship of CBSSM to take on a new position as Senior Investigator in the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health.  He continues to assist with various CBSSM-related research projects.

 

Fri, February 21, 2014

Dr. Reshma Jagsi was involved with a study that reported an increase in women who recieved breast reconstruction following a masectomy for breast cancer. The study found that, "46 percent of patients received reconstruction in 1998 but that figure rose to 63 percent by 2007." Jagsi said, "Breast reconstruction has a big impact on quality of life for breast cancer survivors. As we are seeing more women survive breast cancer, we need to focus on long term survivorship issues and ensuring that women have access to this important part of treatment."

Fri, February 28, 2014

Brian Zikmund-Fisher was quoted in a Scientific American article about risk communication of certain chemicals in the lives of expectant parents. He explains, “Look at your life and the choices you make, and do things that can make you safer easily, but don't overreact to anything ... There are very, very few things out there that have such huge effects on our lives or our baby's lives that one teeny bit of exposure is going to make a difference.”

CBSSM's Co-Director Angela Fagerlin, Ph.D., has been named one of "25 Champions of Shared Decision Making." According to the Informed Medical Decisions Foundation, "Angie has spent her career testing methods for communicating the risks and benefits of treatment options to patients, especially through decision aids. Based on the knowledge she has gained, Angie developed and tested decision aids for prostate cancer and breast cancer prevention. Her work has truly advanced the field of risk communication and patient-physician communication." 

Congratulations Angie! You can view the list here

On May 1, Jeff Kullgren, M.D., M.S., M.P.H., assistant professor of general medicine and a research scientist at VA CCMR and Mark Fendrick, M.D., director of U-M's Center for Value-Based Insurance Design (V-BID) urged the Michigan Senate Health Policy Committee to enact stronger state health care transparency laws, including requirements to make more data on price and quality publically available. "As more Americans face high levels of cost-sharing in their insurance plans, it's even more important to improve access to data that helps them anticipate their out-of-pocket expenses," Kullgren told the panel. Proposed legislation would establish an easily accessible database to help consumers compare both prices and quality of care for various medical procedures and prescriptions.      

Thu, May 22, 2014

Susan Dorr Goold, M.D., M.H.S.A., M.A. is the senior author on an article receiving the annual “Professionalism Article Prize” by the ABIM Foundation. Jon C. Tilburt, M.D., M.P.H. of the Mayo Clinic is the study’s first author.

This award recognizes outstanding contributions to the field of medical professionalism. The article “Views of U.S. Physicians About Controlling Health Care Costs” was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in July 2013.

Research Topics: 
Thu, May 22, 2014

CBSSM faculty member Susan Dorr Goold M.D., M.H.S.A., M.A. was interviewed by the LA Times about doctors assisting with prison executions despite ethics rules.

“Physicians are healers. That knowledge should be used only for healing, not executions,” said Dorr Goold, professor of internal medicine and health management and policy at the University of Michigan who is the Chair of AMA’s Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. “Participation as a physician is not ethical.”

Read the full LA Times story here.

Research Topics: 

Pages