You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 166 No. 6, March 27, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Investigation
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (3)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Conflict of Interest
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Patient-Physician Communication
 •Alert me on articles by topic

A Trial of Disclosing Physicians' Financial Incentives to Patients

Steven D. Pearson, MSc, MD; Ken Kleinman, ScD; Donna Rusinak; Wendy Levinson, MD

Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:623-628.

Background  Concern regarding financial conflict of interest for physicians has led to calls for disclosure of financial incentives to patients. However, limited data on the outcomes of disclosure exist to guide policy.

Methods  This randomized trial was conducted among 8000 adult patients at 2 multispecialty group practices based in the Boston, Mass, and Los Angeles, Calif, areas. Intervention patients were mailed a compensation disclosure letter written by the chief medical officer of their physician group, and all patients were surveyed approximately 3 months later.

Results  Disclosure patients were significantly more able to identify correctly the compensation model of their primary care physician, in Boston (adjusted odds ratio, 2.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.92-2.75) and in Los Angeles (adjusted odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.82). Disclosure patients also had more confidence in their ability to judge the possible influence of incentives on their health care: in Boston, 32.5% vs 17.8% (P<.001); and in Los Angeles, 31.8% vs 26.4% (P = .20). The disclosure intervention did not change trust in primary care physicians overall. However, of patients who remembered receiving the disclosure, 21.4% in Boston and 24.4% in Los Angeles responded that the disclosure had increased trust either greatly or somewhat, while in both cities less than 5% of patients responded that the information decreased trust. Patients' loyalty to their physician group was higher among disclosure patients in Boston (73.4% vs 70.2%; P = .03) and Los Angeles (74.1% vs 66.9%; P = .08).

Conclusions  Among diverse patient populations, a single mailed disclosure letter from physician groups was associated with improved knowledge of physicians' compensation models. Patients' trust in their physicians was unharmed, and their loyalty to their physician group was strengthened. For physician groups with similar compensation programs, disclosure to patients should be considered an effective method to enhance the patient-physician relationship.


Author Affiliations: Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Boston, Mass (Drs Pearson and Kleinman and Ms Rusinak); and Department of Medicine, St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario (Dr Levinson).



THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Conflicted Interests
Smith
Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:425-426.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.