Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32506315›Full record

ArticleClinical rheumatology2021

Patient-provider communication about medication cost in rheumatoid arthritis.

K Julia Kaal, Nick Bansback, Marie Hudson, Aslam Anis, Cheryl Koehn, Mark Harrison

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Shared decision-making practices and patient values in pharmacist outpatient care for rheumatic disease: A multiple correspondence analysis.Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

K Julia KaalFaculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Nick BansbackSchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Marie HudsonDivision of Rheumatology, Jewish General Hospital and Lady Davis Institute, and Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Aslam AnisSchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Cheryl KoehnArthritis Consumer Experts/JointHealth, Vancouver, Canada.
Mark HarrisonFaculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. mark.harrison@ubc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2115-2447
University of British Columbia · CAJewish General Hospital · CAUniversity of British Columbia Hospital · CA

Funding

Canadian Initiative for Outcomes in Rheumatology 2015Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research 16813The Arthritis Society YIS-16-104
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the perceived importance and frequency with which out-of-pocket medication costs are discussed between rheumatologists and patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Canada.

methodsA cross-sectional online survey was distributed to patients with RA and rheumatologists; both were asked to rate their perceived importance of discussing medication costs, and how often these discussions occurred. Predictors of (1) patients discussing costs with their rheumatologist and (2) the perceived importance of discussing medication cost for patients were explored.

resultsSeventy-eight patients and 64 rheumatologists completed the survey; 68% patients and 75% of physicians rated the perceived importance of discussing medication costs as "quite" or "very important"; 22% of patients reported never talking about medication cost, but no physicians reported never discussing costs with patients. The only predictor of talking about cost among patients (at 10% level) was whether they perceived it as highly important (p = 0.058). Higher perceived importance of discussing out-of-pocket costs was associated with a more positive attitude to shared decision-making (p = 0.044).

conclusionDiscussions about cost do not always happen, even with diseases with potentially high medication costs like RA. Cost was more likely to be discussed by patients who perceived it as "very important," suggesting the onus might be on patients to initiate these conversations. Without any significant predictors regarding what may make physicians more likely to think it was important to discuss medication costs, there is a need to reinforce recommendations that all physicians seek to discuss costs with all of their patients when suggesting medications. Key Points • There is a need for patients and physicians to discuss costs in the treatment decision-making process. Our findings suggest this does not always happen. • Among patients, medication cost was more likely to be discussed by those who perceived it as "very important" and higher perceived importance of discussing out-of-pocket costs was associated with a more positive attitude to shared decision-making. • Our results did not reveal any significant predictors regarding what may make physicians more likely to think it was important to discuss medication costs, suggesting that there is a need to reinforce recommendations that all physicians seek to discuss medication costs with all of their patients when suggesting medications.

Indexed as

Arthritis, RheumatoidCommunicationCanadaCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsRheumatologistsCommunicationMedication costPatient-centeredRheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID32506315
OpenAlexW3033542803

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.