Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
211 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2011-04-16
2016-09-16
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
\- The costs of medical care have a major effect on patients during illness and treatment. Surveys with patients and doctors show that both are interested in discussing the costs of treatment. But they rarely talk about these issues. Both worry about whether it is appropriate to discuss financial matters in the clinical setting. They are also concerned about whether this topic will be an awkward one. Researchers are interested in studying how people want their doctors to talk to them about the costs of illness and medical care.
Objectives:
\- To explore and better understand patients views on whether and how doctors should talk about the costs of illness and medical care.
Eligibility:
\- English- or Spanish-speaking adults (at least 18 years of age) who are covered by health insurance.
Design:
* Participants will be asked to take part in a 2 1/2-hour focus group. Ten to 12 people will come together to discuss their thoughts and opinions.
* A member of the research team will lead the group discussion. The leader will ask a list of questions about health care payment issues. Those in the focus group will discuss these issues.
* Participants will receive a small cash payment and a light snack.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Disclosure of Industry Payments to Physicians and the Patient-Doctor Relationship
NCT02179632
Enhancing Empathy in Medical Communication Through Perspective-Taking
NCT00861991
The Effect of Informative Letters on the Prescription and Receipt of Seroquel
NCT02467933
A Randomized Trial of Patient Financial Incentives to Reduce CVD Risk
NCT02035826
Ethical Dilemmas in Clinical Practice: A Survey of European Physicians
NCT00352573
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The cost of illness and medical care has profound implications for society as a whole and for individual patients as they experience being sick and seeking treatment. It is both appropriate and imperative that these costs be discussed in the doctor-patient encounter. Surveys with patients and doctors show that both parties have the desire to discuss costs, yet they rarely have these conversations because of worries about the appropriateness and potential awkwardness of discussing financial matters in the clinical encounter.
In the existing literature we find that patients express a preference for more care, newer care, and expensive care (as they believe cost indicates better care), and they react negatively to conversations they perceive as encouraging rationing. Yet rationing - the use of allocation criteria to distribute resources - is inevitable when resources are limited, and acceptable when done fairly. Recognizing the need for bedside rationing and endeavoring to promote bedside rationing are not antithetical to patient-centered care, however. Open and honest conversations about rationing, when carried out appropriately, can be consistent with patient-centered care and the view of patients as moral agents.
Patients resistance to discussions of rationing, coupled with the financial burden of illness and the reality of rising health care costs, all point to the pressing need to explore strategies for how physicians can address costs in ways that are understanding, empathic, and palatable to patients. In the literature we find scant empirical evidence about how patients would react to doctors talking about (and considering) costs. This study seeks the patient perspective on how these honest conversations about costs can be carried out in a sensitive and appropriate manner.
OBJECTIVE:
This project aims to explore and better understand patients perspectives about whether and how doctors should talk about and address the costs of illness and medical care. Ultimately we hope to promote the ability of doctors to discuss and address financial issues in their encounters with patients in a way that maintains trust, advocacy and integrity.
* Participants will be more receptive to discussing personal costs than societal (pooled) costs with their physicians.
* Willingness to discuss personal cost in the clinical encounter will vary with participant socio-demographic characteristics.
* Following group discussions about addressing cost of care in the clinical encounter, participants will be more receptive to discussion of costs in the clinical encounter.
* Following group discussion, participants will be more inclined to choose less expensive care.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* age (working adults with and without dependents and retirees); ethnic/racial groups (African American, Latino, Non-Hispanic whites);
* varied economic status (incomes below 300% of the Federal poverty threshold, and above).
* Specifically, participants will be recruited to ensure sufficient socio-demographic representation and adequate numbers to test our study hypotheses. Because we will recruit subjects with the intention of producing generalizable results, we will not recruit disproportionate numbers of HHS or other federal employees (although these individuals will not be excluded from participation).
* After the two pilot groups, twenty focus groups each including 8-12 participants will be conducted for a maximum total of 264 participants. Of the twenty focus groups, sixteen will be conducted in English and 4 will be conducted in Spanish.
* Half of participants will have incomes under 300% of the federal poverty threshold in order to guarantee ascertainment of perspectives of participants of varied socio-economic status.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
NIH
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Marion Danis, M.D.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC)
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
RAND
Santa Monica, California, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Blendon RJ, Brodie M, Benson JM, Altman DE, Buhr T. Americans' views of health care costs, access, and quality. Milbank Q. 2006;84(4):623-57. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2006.00463.x.
Coast J. Who wants to know if their care is rationed? Views of citizens and service informants. Health Expect. 2001 Dec;4(4):243-52. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2001.00147.x.
Halpern J. What is clinical empathy? J Gen Intern Med. 2003 Aug;18(8):670-4. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.21017.x.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
11-CH-N133
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: secondary_id
999911133
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.