IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/exc/wpaper/2017-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fit as a Fiddle or Sick as a Dog: Effects of Subjective Patient Reports on Uptake of Clinical Decision Support

Author

Listed:
  • James C. Cox
  • Vjollca Sadiraj
  • Kurt E. Schnier
  • John F. Sweeney

Abstract

This paper reports research on improving decisions about hospital discharge - a critical healthcare quality and cost determinant identified by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We report an experiment on effects of subjective information about patients' health status on discharge decisions as well as uptake of recommendations from a clinical decision support system (CDSS). Subjective information about readiness for discharge was obtained during examinations of standardized patients, who are regularly employed in medical education, but in our experiment had been given scripts developed for the experimental treatments. The CDSS presents evidence-based discharge recommendations obtained from econometric analysis of data from de identified electronic health records (EHR) of hospital patients. Subjects in the experiment were third and fourth year medical students. We find that the CDSS decreases hospital stay by one day while decreasing readmissions of high-risk patients. Subjects are responding appropriately to information conveyed by standardized patients when such information is consistent with the EHR. Compared to patient discharge from the hospital absent patient reports, Eager patients when also EHR-Fit are at least seven times more likely to be discharged whereas Reluctant patients when also EHR-Sick are about four times less likely to be discharged.

Suggested Citation

  • James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj & Kurt E. Schnier & John F. Sweeney, 2017. "Fit as a Fiddle or Sick as a Dog: Effects of Subjective Patient Reports on Uptake of Clinical Decision Support," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2017-03, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, revised Aug 2020.
  • Handle: RePEc:exc:wpaper:2017-03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://excen.gsu.edu/workingpapers/GSU_EXCEN_WP_2017-03.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2017
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://excen.gsu.edu/workingpapers/GSU_EXCEN_WP_2020-03.pdf
    File Function: Revised version, 2020
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cox, James C. & Sadiraj, Vjollca & Schnier, Kurt E. & Sweeney, John F., 2016. "Incentivizing cost-effective reductions in hospital readmission rates," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 24-35.
    2. Cox, James C. & Sadiraj, Vjollca & Schnier, Kurt E. & Sweeney, John F., 2016. "Higher quality and lower cost from improving hospital discharge decision making," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 1-16.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nadja Kairies-Schwarz & Claudia Souček, 2020. "Performance Pay in Hospitals: An Experiment on Bonus–Malus Incentives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-29, November.
    2. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Groß, Mona & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Wiesen, Daniel, 2021. "Physicians' incentives, patients' characteristics, and quality of care: A systematic experimental comparison of fee-for-service, capitation, and pay for performance," Ruhr Economic Papers 923, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    3. Castro, M.F.; & Ferrara, P.; & Guccio, C.; & Lisi, D.;, 2018. "Medical Malpractice Liability and Physicians’ Behavior:Experimental Evidence," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 18/11, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    4. Castro, Massimo Finocchiaro & Ferrara, Paolo Lorenzo & Guccio, Calogero & Lisi, Domenico, 2019. "Medical malpractice liability and physicians’ behavior: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 646-666.
    5. Domenico Lisi & Luigi Siciliani & Odd Rune Straume, 2020. "Hospital competition under pay‐for‐performance: Quality, mortality, and readmissions," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 289-314, April.
    6. Cox, James C. & Sadiraj, Vjollca & Schnier, Kurt E. & Sweeney, John F., 2016. "Incentivizing cost-effective reductions in hospital readmission rates," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 24-35.
    7. Duncan James & Daniel Friedman & Christina Louie & Taylor O'Meara, 2018. "Dissecting The Monty Hall Anomaly," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(3), pages 1817-1826, July.
    8. Moscelli, Giuseppe & Gravelle, Hugh & Siciliani, Luigi & Gutacker, Nils, 2018. "The effect of hospital ownership on quality of care: Evidence from England," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 322-344.
    9. Finocchiaro Castro, Massimo & Ferrara, Paolo Lorenzo & Guccio, Calogero & Lisi, Domenico, 2021. "Optimal mixed payment system and medical liability. A laboratory study," MPRA Paper 110276, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Finocchiaro Castro, Massimo & Guccio, Calogero & Romeo, Domenica, 2022. "A systematic literature review of 10 years of behavioral research on health services," EconStor Preprints 266248, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experiment; Decision Support; Patient Reports; Default Option;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:exc:wpaper:2017-03. 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: J. Todd Swarthout (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/exgsuus.html .

    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.