Addressing Medication Costs During Primary Care Visits: A Before-After Study of Team-Based Training

Factors Affecting Adherence in Allergic Disorders and Strategies for Improvement

Addressing patient adherence is a key element in ensuring positive health outcomes and improving health-related quality of life for patients with atopic and immunologic disorders. Understanding the complex etiologies of patient nonadherence and identifying real-world solutions is important for clinicians, patients, and systems to design and effect change. This review serves as an important resource for defining key issues related to patient nonadherence and outlines solutions, resources, knowledge gaps, and advocacy areas across five domains: health care access, financial considerations, socioenvironmental factors, health literacy, and psychosocial factors. To allow for more easily digestible and usable content, we describe solutions based on three macrolevels of focus: patient, clinician, and system. This review and interactive tool kit serve as an educational resource and call to action to improve equitable distribution of resources, institutional policies, patient-centered care, and practice guidelines for improving health outcomes for all patients with atopic and immunologic disorders.

Financial-legal navigation reduces financial toxicity of pediatric, adolescent, and young adult cancers

BACKGROUND

Pediatric, adolescent, and young adult patients with cancer and their caregivers are at high risk of financial toxicity, and few evidence-based oncology financial and legal navigation programs exist to address it. We tested the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of Financial and Insurance Navigation Assistance, a novel interdisciplinary financial and legal navigation intervention for pediatric, adolescent and young adult patients and their caregivers.

METHODS

We used a single-arm feasibility and acceptability trial design in a pediatric hematology and oncology clinic and collected preintervention and postintervention surveys to assess changes in financial toxicity (3 domains: psychological response/Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity [COST], material conditions, and coping behaviors); health-related quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical and Mental Health, Anxiety, Depression, and Parent Proxy scales); and perceived feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness.

RESULTS

In total, 45 participants received financial navigation, 6 received legal navigation, and 10 received both. Among 15 adult patients, significant improvements in FACIT-COST (P = .041) and physical health (P = .036) were noted. Among 46 caregivers, significant improvements were noted for FACIT-COST (P < .001), the total financial toxicity score (P = .001), and the parent proxy global health score (P = .0037). We were able to secure roughly $335 323 in financial benefits for 48 participants. The intervention was rated highly for feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrating financial and legal navigation through Financial and Insurance Navigation Assistance was feasible and acceptable and underscores the benefit of a multidisciplinary approach to addressing financial toxicity.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION

NCT05876325.

Quality of Medication Cost Conversations and Interest in Future Cost Conversations Among Older Adults

BACKGROUND

Medication cost conversations occur less frequently than patients prefer, and it is unclear whether patients have positive experiences with them when they do occur.

OBJECTIVE

To describe patients' experiences discussing their medication costs with their health care team.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Nationally representative survey fielded in the United States in 2022 (response rate = 48.5%).

PATIENTS

1020 adults over age 65.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary measures were adapted from Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers Survey visit survey v4.0 and captured patients' experiences of medication cost conversations. Additional measures captured patients' interest in future cost conversations, the type of clinicians with whom they would be comfortable discussing costs, and sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 1020 respondents who discussed medication prices with their health care team, 39.3% were 75 or older and 78.6% were non-Hispanic White. Forty-three percent of respondents indicated that their prior medication cost conversation was not easy to understand; 3% indicated their health care team was not respectful and 26% indicated their health care team was somewhat respectful during their last conversation; 48% indicated that there was not enough time. Those reporting that their prior discussion was not easy to understand or that their clinician was not definitely respectful were less likely to be interested in future discussions. Only 6% and 10% of respondents indicated being comfortable discussing medication prices with financial counselors or social workers, respectively. Few differences in responses were observed by survey participant characteristics.

LIMITATIONS

This cross-sectional survey of prior experiences may be subject to recall bias.

CONCLUSION

Among older adults who engaged in prior medication cost conversations, many report that these conversations are not easy to understand and that almost one-third of clinicians were somewhat or not respectful. Efforts to increase the frequency of medication cost conversations should consider parallel interventions to ensure the discussions are effective at informing prescribing decisions and reducing cost-related medication nonadherence.

Demand for and Occurrence of Medication Cost Conversations: A Narrative Review

High medication prices can create a financial burden for patients and reduce medication initiation. To improve decision making, public policy is supporting development of tools to provide real-time prescription drug prices. We reviewed the literature on medication cost conversations to characterize the context in which these tools may be used. Our review included 42 articles: a median of 84% of patients across four clinical specialties reported a desire for cost conversations (n = 7 articles) but only 23% reported having held a cost conversation across six specialties (n = 16 articles). Non-White and older patients were less likely to report having held a cost conversation than White and younger patients in 9 of 13 and 5 of 9 articles, respectively, examining these associations. Our review indicates that tools providing price information may not result in improved decision making without complementary interventions that increase the frequency of cost conversations with a focus on protected groups.

Opinions and strategies of Australian health professionals on tackling cancer-related financial toxicity: A nationwide survey

AIM

To understand the opinions and current practices of health professionals on the topic of addressing cancer-related financial toxicity among patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was distributed through Australian clinical oncology professional organizations/networks. The multidisciplinary Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Financial Toxicity Working Group developed 25 questions relating to the frequency and comfort levels of patient-clinician discussions, opinions about their role, strategies used, and barriers to providing solutions for patients. Descriptive statistics were used and subgroup analyses were undertaken by occupational groups.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-seven health professionals completed the survey. The majority were female (n = 213, 77%), worked in public facilities (200, 72%), and treated patients with varied cancer types across all of Australia. Most participants agreed that it was appropriate in their clinical role to discuss financial concerns and 231 (88%) believed that these discussions were an important part of high-quality care. However, 73 (28%) stated that they did not have the appropriate information on support services or resources to facilitate such conversations, differing by occupation group; 7 (11%) social workers, 34 (44%) medical specialists, 18 (25%) nurses, and 14 (27%) of other occupations. Hindrances to discussing financial concerns were insufficient resources or support systems to refer to, followed by lack of time in a typical consultation.

CONCLUSION

Health professionals in cancer care commonly address the financial concerns of their patients but attitudes differed across occupations about their role, and frustrations were raised about available solutions. Resources supporting financial-related discussions for all health professionals are urgently needed to advance action in this field.

Medical-Legal Partnerships Facilitate Patient-Provider Cost of Care Conversations: A Multisite Qualitative Study in the U.S

This study examines the impact of medical-legal partnerships on facilitating and managing outcomes of patient-provider cost of care conversations. We conducted 96 semi-structured interviews with 18 patients and 78 medical-legal partnership personnel from 10 states between March and November of 2020. The presence of legal staff helped strengthen interdisciplinary collaborations and build confidence among providers around addressing health-harming legal needs through effective cost of care conversations. Medical-legal partnerships with well-established provider training opportunities reported effective cost of care conversations, improved patient outcomes, and increased return on investment for health systems. Lack of time, knowledge, and training were identified as barriers to clinicians engaging in cost of care conversations. Positive patient outcomes included improved access to public benefits, health benefits, financial benefits, special education services, stable housing, and food. Medical-legal partnerships facilitate effective patient-provider cost of care conversations that improve patients' medical, legal, and social service outcomes.

Interventions supporting cost conversations between patients and clinicians: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Discussing cost during medical encounters may decrease the financial impact of medical care on patients and align their treatment plans with their financial capacities. We aimed to examine which interventions exist and quantify their effectiveness to support cost conversations.

METHODS

Several databases were queried (Embase; Ovid MEDLINE(R); Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily; the Cochrane databases; and Scopus) from their inception until January 31, 2020 using terms such as "clinician*", "patient*", "cost*", and "conversation*". Eligibility assessment, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently and in duplicate. We extracted study setting, design, intervention characteristics and outcomes related to patients, clinicians and quality metrics.

RESULTS

We identified four studies (1327 patients) meeting our inclusion criteria. All studies were non-randomised and conducted in the United States. Three were performed in a primary care setting and the fourth in an oncology. Two studies used decision aids that included cost information; one used a training session for health care staff about cost conversations, and the other directly delivered information regarding cost conversations to patients. All interventions increased cost-conversation frequency. There was no effect on out-of-pocket costs, satisfaction, medication adherence or understanding of costs of care.

CONCLUSION

The body of evidence is small and comprised of studies at high risk of bias. However, an increase in the frequency of cost conversations is consistent. Studies with higher quality are needed to ascertain the effects of these interventions on the acceptability, frequency and quality of cost conversations.

Using Shared Decision-Making Tools and Patient-Clinician Conversations About Costs

Objective

To determine how shared decision-making (SDM) tools used during clinical encounters that raise cost as an issue impact the incidence of cost conversations between patients and clinicians.

Patients and Methods

A randomly selected set of 220 video recordings of clinical encounters were analyzed. Videos were obtained from eight practice-based randomized clinical trials and one quasi-randomized clinical trial (pre- and post-) comparing care with and without SDM tools. The secondary analysis took place in 2018 from trials ran between 2007 and 2015.

Results

Most patient participants were white (85%), educated (38% completed college), middle-aged (mean age 56 years), and female (61%). There were 105 encounters with and 115 without the SDM tool. Encounters with SDM tools were more likely to include both general cost conversations (62% vs 36%, odds ratio [OR]: 9.6; 95% CI: 4 to 26) as well as conversations on medication costs specifically (89% vs 51%, P=.01). However, clinicians using SDM tools were less likely to address cost issues during the encounter (37% vs 51%, P=.04). Encounters with patients with less than a college degree were also associated with a higher incidence of cost conversations.

Conclusion

Using SDM tools that raise cost as an issue increased the occurrence of cost conversations but was less likely to address cost issues or offer potential solutions to patients’ cost concerns. This result suggests that SDM tools used during the consultation can trigger cost conversations but are insufficient to support them.

Effective Cost Conversations: Addressing Financial Toxicity and Cost-Related Health Literacy

Cancer survivors have greater risk of experiencing financial toxicity, or the undue financial burden and stress that patients face related to the costs of cancer care. Cost-related health literacy promotion should begin at the point of care with effective cost-of-care conversations that help to identify and manage patient financial needs. Nurses are uniquely positioned and often sought out as trusted sources of cost-of-care information and play a key role in engaging in effective cost conversations that help consumers to understand and manage their costs of care.

Protocol paper: Stepped wedge cluster randomized trial translating the ABCS into optimizing cardiovascular care for people living with HIV

People living with HIV (PWH) are at higher risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and stroke in comparison to their non-infected counterparts. The ABCS (aspirin-blood pressure control-cholesterol control-smoking cessation) reduce atherosclerotic (ASCVD) risk in the general population, but little is known regarding strategies for promoting the ABCS among PWH. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we designed multilevel implementation strategies that target PWH and their clinicians to promote appropriate use of the ABCS based on a 10-year estimated ASCVD risk. Implementation strategies include patient coaching, automated texting, peer phone support, academic detailing and audit and feedback for the patient's clinician. We are evaluating implementation through a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial based on the Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Maintenance/Qualitative-Evaluation-for-Systematic-Translation (RE-AIM/QuEST) mixed methods framework that integrates quantitative and qualitative assessments. The primary outcome is change in ASCVD risk. Findings will have important implications regarding strategies for reducing ASCVD risk among PWH.