Objectives: Given that many patients with chronic diseases face cost-related barriers to care, we evaluated patients' views on which providers (both physicians and nonphysicians) to involve and which methods to use to screen for those barriers. We also examined patients' preferences for how physicians consider cost-efficacy trade-offs in decisions.
Study design: A national survey of 1400 randomly sampled adults with a chronic disease seeking financial assistance (842 respondents).
Methods: Participants rated their comfort with various providers and tools for identifying cost barriers. Then they rated a randomly assigned clinical vignette that described how a clinical decision was made in the context of a cost-efficacy tradeoff. Vignettes depicted 3 decision types: cost-conscious physician, cost-indifferent physician, or patient-directed. Comfort was rated from 1 to 10-ratings above 7 indicated high comfort.
Results: More respondents reported high comfort with physicians screening for cost barriers (81.1%) than with pharmacists (74.8%; P=.002), nurses (69.4%; P<.001), professional counselors (68.3%; P<.001), and trained volunteers (50.5%; P<.001). Regarding screening for cost barriers using administrative records, more respondents reported higher comfort with doctors' offices (58.8%) than with insurance companies (53.3%; P=.03), but similar levels of comfort compared to pharmacies (62.1%; P=.17). Participants favored "patient-directed" decisions with physician input (odds ratio, 4.64; 95% CI, 3.14-6.84; P<.001) compared with "cost-conscious" decisions in which physicians unilaterally decided how to manage cost-efficacy tradeoffs.
Conclusions: Patients were open to a range of cost-barrier screening approaches, but most favor direct conversations with their doctor and shared decision making in decisions involving cost-efficacy trade-offs.