IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0273620.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discussion of costs and financial burden in clinical practice: A survey of medical oncologists in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Anupriya Agarwal
  • Deme J Karikios
  • Martin R Stockler
  • Rachael L Morton

Abstract

Background: A diagnosis of cancer is associated with significant physical, psychological and financial burden. Including costs of cancer is an important component of shared decision making. Doctors bear a responsibility towards educating patients about the financial aspects of care. Multiple organisations have advocated for price transparency and implementing Informed Financial Consent in the clinic. However, few studies have evaluated the perspectives of oncologists on the current state of this discussion. Aims: The aim of this study is to determine the views and perspectives of medical oncologists regarding communication of costs and financial burden in patients with cancer. Methods: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional online survey via REDCap. The survey was distributed to medical oncologists and advanced trainees currently registered with Medical Oncology Group of Australia (MOGA). Data was collected using the online survey comprising socio-demographic characteristics, discussion of costs and financial burden, and facilitators and barriers to these discussions. Results: 547 members of MOGA were invited to participate in the study, and 106 of 547 MOGA members (19%) completed the survey. Most oncologists (66%) felt that it was their responsibility to discuss costs of care, however a majority of oncologists (59.3%) reported discussing costs with less than half of their patients. Only 25% of oncologists discussed financial concerns with more than half of their patients, and most oncologists were unfamiliar with cancer-related financial burden. Most Oncologists with greater clinical experience and those working in private practice were more likely to discuss costs with a majority of their patients. Conclusions: Certain characteristics of medical oncologists and their practices were associated with reported prevalence of discussing costs of care and financial burden with their patients. In the context of rising costs of cancer care, interventions targeting modifiable factors such as raising oncologist awareness of costs of care and financial burden, screening for financial toxicity and availability of costs information in an easily accessible manner, may help increase the frequency of patient-doctor discussions about costs of care, contributing to informed decision-making and higher-quality cancer care.

Suggested Citation

  • Anupriya Agarwal & Deme J Karikios & Martin R Stockler & Rachael L Morton, 2022. "Discussion of costs and financial burden in clinical practice: A survey of medical oncologists in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-12, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0273620
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273620
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0273620
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0273620&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0273620?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:plo:pmed00:0040296 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0273620. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.