Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 32, Issue 7, pp 732–738 | Cite as

Can Appealing to Patient Altruism Reduce Overuse of Health Care Services? An Experimental Survey

Original Research

Abstract

Background

A challenge to reducing overuse of health services is communicating recommendations against unnecessary health services to patients. The predominant approach has been to highlight the limited benefit and potential harm of such services for that patient, but the prudent use of health resources can also benefit others. Whether appealing to patient altruism can reduce overuse is unknown.

Objective

To determine whether altruistic appeals reduce hypothetical requests for overused services and affect physician ratings.

Design

Experimental survey using hypothetical vignettes describing three overused health services (antibiotics for acute sinusitis, imaging for acute low back pain, and annual exams for healthy adults).

Participants

U.S. adults recruited from Research Now, an online panel of individuals compensated for performing academic and marketing research surveys.

Interventions

In the control version of the vignettes, the physician’s rationale for recommending against the service was the minimal benefit and potential for harm. In the altruism version, the rationale additionally included potential benefit to others by forgoing that service.

Main Measures

Differences in requests for overused services and physician ratings between participants randomized to the control and altruism versions of the vignettes.

Key Results

A total of 1001 participants were included in the final analyses. There were no significant differences in requests for overused services for any of the clinical scenarios (P values ranged from 0.183 to 0.547). Physician ratings were lower in the altruism version for the acute sinusitis (6.68 vs. 7.03, P = 0.012) and back pain scenarios (6.14 vs. 6.83, P < 0.001), and marginally lower for the healthy adult scenario (5.27 vs. 5.57, P = 0.084).

Conclusions

In this experimental survey, altruistic appeals delivered by physicians did not reduce requests for overused services, and resulted in more negative physician ratings. Further studies are warranted to determine whether alternative methods of appealing to patient altruism can reduce overuse.

KEY WORDS

overuse altruism primary care 

Supplementary material

11606_2017_4002_MOESM1_ESM.docx (56 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 56 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Berwick DM, Nolan TW, Whittington J. The triple aim: care, health, and cost. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(3):759–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chassin MR, Galvin RW, National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. The urgent need to improve health care quality: institute of medicine national roundtable on health care quality. JAMA. 1998;280(11):1000–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fisher ES, Shortell SM. Accountable care organizations: accountable for what, to whom, and how. JAMA. 2010;304(15):1715–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cassel CK, Guest JA. Choosing wisely: helping physicians and patients make smart decisions about their care. JAMA. 2012;307(17):1801–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roman BR, Asch DA. Faded promises: the challenge of deadopting low-value care. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161(2):149–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ubel PA, Asch DA. Creating value in health by understanding and overcoming resistance to de-innovation. Health Aff (Millwood). 2015;34(2):239–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carman KL, Maurer M, Yegian JM, et al. Evidence that consumers are skeptical about evidence-based health care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(7):1400–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brett AS, McCullough LB. Addressing requests by patients for nonbeneficial interventions. JAMA. 2012;307(2):149–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kupfer JM, Bond EU. Patient satisfaction and patient-centered care: necessary but not equal. JAMA. 2012;308(2):139–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gliwa C, Pearson SD. Evidentiary rationales for the choosing wisely top 5 lists. JAMA. 2014;311(14):1443–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rosenberg A, Agiro A, Gottlieb M, et al. Early trends among seven recommendations from the choosing wisely campaign. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(12):1913–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hershey JC, Asch DA, Thumasathit T, Meszaros J, Waters VV. The roles of altruism, free riding, and bandwagoning in vaccination decisions. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1994;59(2):177–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jasper JD, Nickerson CA, Ubel PA, Asch DA. Altruism, incentives, and organ donation: attitudes of the transplant community. Med Care. 2004;42(4):378–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jansen LA. The ethics of altruism in clinical research. Hast Cent Rep. 2009;39(4):26–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wolfson D, Santa J, Slass L. Engaging physicians and consumers in conversations about treatment overuse and waste: a short history of the choosing wisely campaign. Acad Med. 2014;89(7):990–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation, American College of Physicians – American Society of Internal Medicine Foundation, European Federation of Internal Medicine. Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physician charter. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136(3):243–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Doukas DJ, Hardwig J. Patient informed choice for altruism. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2014;23(4):397–402.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reuben DB, Cassel CK. Physician stewardship of health care in an era of finite resources. JAMA. 2011;306(4):430–1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cho MK, Magnus D, Constantine M, et al. Attitudes toward risk and informed consent for research on medical practices: a cross-sectional survey. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(10):690–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khare S, Hajat S, Kovats S, et al. Heat protection behaviour in the UK: results of an online survey after the 2013 heatwave. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Potosky AL, Malin JL, Kim B, et al. Use of colony-stimulating factors with chemotherapy: opportunities for cost savings and improved outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(12):979–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. CAHPS: Surveys and Tools to Advance Patient-Centered Care. http://www.ahrq.gov/cahps/index.html. Accessed August 18, 2016.
  23. 23.
    Smith TW. Altruism and Empathy in America: Trends and Correlates. Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center; 2006.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kaji AH, Lewis RJ. Noninferiority trials: is a new treatment almost as effective as another? JAMA. 2015;313(23):2371–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sullivan GM, Feinn R. Using effect size-or why the P value is not enough. J Grad Med Educ. 2012;4(3):279–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weinick RM, Elliott MN, Volandes AE, Lopez L, Burkhart Q, Schlesinger M. Using standardized encounters to understand reported racial/ethnic disparities in patient experiences with care. Health Serv Res. 2011;46(2):491–509.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vietri JT, Li M, Galvani AP, Chapman GB. Vaccinating to help ourselves and others. Med Dec Making. 2012;32(3):447–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Paulhus DL, Shaffer DR, Downing LL. Effects of making blood donor motives salient upon donor retention: a field experiment. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 1976;3(1):99–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Batson CD, Powell AA. Altruism and prosocial behavior. In: Handbook of Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2003:463–84.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Emanuel EJ, Ubel PA, Kessler JB, et al. Using behavioral economics to design physician incentives that deliver high-value care. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(2):114–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Reiter SM, Samuel W. Littering as a function of prior litter and the presence or absence of prohibitive signs. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1980;10(1):45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sommers R, Goold SD, McGlynn EA, Pearson SD, Danis M. Focus groups highlight that many patients object to clinicians’ focusing on costs. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32(2):338–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Casarett D. The science of choosing wisely—overcoming the therapeutic illusion. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(13):1203–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Goroll AH. Toward trusting therapeutic relationships—in favor of the annual physical. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(16):1487–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mehrotra A, Prochazka A. Improving value in health care—against the annual physical. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(16):1485–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bass EB. Controversy about choosing wisely and creating value for patients. SGIM Forum. 2014;37(3):1–2.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schwartz B. Preventing the spread of antimicrobial resistance among bacterial respiratory pathogens in industrialized countries: the case for judicious antimicrobial use. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;28(2):211–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin R. Riggs
    • 1
  • Peter A. Ubel
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
  • Brendan Saloner
    • 6
    • 7
  1. 1.Division of Preventive MedicineUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA
  2. 2.Department of MedicineDuke University School of MedicineDurhamUSA
  3. 3.Fuqua School of BusinessDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  4. 4.Sanford School of Public PolicyDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  5. 5.Margolis Center for Health PolicyDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  6. 6.Department of Health Policy and ManagementJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthBaltimoreUSA
  7. 7.Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of BioethicsBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations