Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27913910›Full record

Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2017

A Randomized Trial of Displaying Paid Price Information on Imaging Study and Procedure Ordering Rates.

Alyna T Chien, Lisa Soleymani Lehmann, Laura A Hatfield, Kate E Koplan, Carter R Petty, Anna D Sinaiko, Meredith B Rosenthal, Thomas D Sequist

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Huisarts en wetenschap · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Alyna T ChienHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. alyna.chien@childrens.harvard.edu.
Lisa Soleymani LehmannHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Laura A HatfieldDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Kate E KoplanKaiser Permanente of Georgia, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Carter R PettyClinical Research Center, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Anna D SinaikoDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Meredith B RosenthalDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Thomas D SequistDivision of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrior studies have demonstrated how price transparency lowers the test-ordering rates of trainees in hospitals, and physician-targeted price transparency efforts have been viewed as a promising cost-controlling strategy.

objectiveTo examine the effect of displaying paid-price information on test-ordering rates for common imaging studies and procedures within an accountable care organization (ACO).

designBlock randomized controlled trial for 1 year. SUBJECTS: A total of 1205 fully licensed clinicians (728 primary care, 477 specialists).

interventionStarting January 2014, clinicians in the Control arm received no price display; those in the intervention arms received Single or Paired Internal/External Median Prices in the test-ordering screen of their electronic health record. Internal prices were the amounts paid by insurers for the ACO's services; external paid prices were the amounts paid by insurers for the same services when delivered by unaffiliated providers. MAIN MEASURES: Ordering rates (orders per 100 face-to-face encounters with adult patients): overall, designated to be completed internally within the ACO, considered "inappropriate" (e.g., MRI for simple headache), and thought to be "appropriate" (e.g., screening colonoscopy). KEY

resultsWe found no significant difference in overall ordering rates across the Control, Single Median Price, or Paired Internal/External Median Prices study arms. For every 100 encounters, clinicians in the Control arm ordered 15.0 (SD 31.1) tests, those in the Single Median Price arm ordered 15.0 (SD 16.2) tests, and those in the Paired Prices arms ordered 15.7 (SD 20.5) tests (one-way ANOVA p-value 0.88). There was no difference in ordering rates for tests designated to be completed internally or considered to be inappropriate or appropriate.

conclusionsDisplaying paid-price information did not alter how frequently primary care and specialist clinicians ordered imaging studies and procedures within an ACO. Those with a particular interest in removing waste from the health care system may want to consider a variety of contextual factors that can affect physician-targeted price transparency.

Indexed as

Accountable Care OrganizationsAdultClinical Decision-MakingCost ControlDiagnostic ImagingElectronic Health RecordsHealth Care CostsHealth Services ResearchHumansMassachusettsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Unnecessary Procedureselectronic health recordhealth services researchrandomized trials

Identifiers

PMID27913910
PMCPMC5377881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.