Perspectives and practices of oncology providers in addressing financial toxicity.

Authors

null

Meera Vimala Ragavan

Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA

Meera Vimala Ragavan , Divya Ahuja Parikh , Manali I. Patel

Organizations

Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, Division of Oncology, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA

Research Funding

Other

Background: Few studies have evaluated the perspectives and clinical practices of oncology providers in regards to assisting patients with financial toxicity. Our study sought to assess providers’ attitudes regarding their role in addressing patients’ financial concerns, understand practice patterns in discussing cost of care, and obtain feedback on potential interventions to help address existing barriers. Methods: We developed an 18-question electronic, anonymous survey informed by an extensive literature search and piloted with three physicians with health services research experience. We emailed the survey to 75 attending physicians in Medical Oncology, Hematology, and Radiation Oncology, 117 advance practice practitioners (APPs) and 46 trainees. Responses during the study period 12/12/2018-1/31/2019 were analyzed. Results: A total of 71 (response rate of 30%) participants completed the survey, including 31 attending physicians, 28 APPs, and 12 trainees. Sixty-two percent of participants agreed that oncology providers should openly discuss cost of care with patients. There was wide variation in opinion around whether providers should offer the same treatment recommendations to all patients regardless of cost, with one third stating they agreed, one third stating they disagreed, and one third stating they were neutral. Sixty-one percent of participants did not use any cost-effectiveness tools in decision making. Sixty-three percent of respondents stated that a gap in knowledge of out of pocket costs was the number one barrier to helping patients avoid financial toxicity. The highest ranked intervention of those listed was a guide on available resources for patients with financial needs, voted for by 70% of respondents. Conclusions: Providers identified many barriers at our institution to discussing cost of care, including lack of transparency of out of pocket costs and lack of awareness of available resources. Providers were overwhelmingly interested in incorporating institutional resources and cost-effectiveness tools into their clinical practices. These findings can inform provider-level interventions to better address the financial burden patients face with their cancer care.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2019 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Publication Only

Session Title

Health Services Research, Clinical Informatics, and Quality of Care: Publication Only

Track

Quality Care/Health Services Research

Sub Track

Value/Cost of Care

Citation

J Clin Oncol 37, 2019 (suppl; abstr e18342)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.e18342

Abstract #

e18342

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Meera Vimala Ragavan

First Author: Emily MacDuffie

Abstract

2019 ASCO Annual Meeting

Factors associated with physician attitude and management of financial toxicity.

First Author: Katrina Fischer