Doctor, how much will this cost?

When I was young, newly married, and in graduate school, I needed to have some wisdom teeth extracted. I went to a dentist near my home, and he took x-rays and explained what all needed to be done for the extraction. I had little money at the time and I asked, necessarily, how much it would all cost. He gave an exasperated sigh and told me we’d talk about that later. We wouldn’t, because I asked for my x-rays and left without scheduling the extraction.

Through family, I managed to find a dentist who was willing to do the extraction for a set Stethoscopeprice with the caveat that one always runs the risk of unexpected and unavoidable complications running up the costs. In the latter event, this dentist, knowing my family, agreed to work on a reasonable repayment plan. The extraction went well, I was able to pay for it, and we all went on about our business.

The remarkable part of this story is that I never again had a frank discussion with any healthcare provider regarding the cost of treatment, though I have often been shocked by the prices of tests, prescriptions, and other services.

Ideally, I think when doctors (or other providers) tell patients about a treatment’s risks, side effects, and benefits they should also talk about the treatment’s cost and whether there are cheaper alternatives. Sometimes, a cheaper alternative is just as efficacious as the expensive choice the doctor is prescribing. In this way, discussions of cost can be woven seamlessly into the informed consent process.

Of course, adding a discussion of price to the informed consent process will add another burden for doctors, who are already feeling pressured for time. In a column in the New York Times, cardiologist Sandeep Jauhar points out that reduced payments to doctors have forced doctors to take on more patients to maintain their income. As a result, doctors spend even less time talking to patients and feel even more rushed to move on to the next patient. Adding a discussion of cost to informed consent will only create more pressure for the doctor to hurry through each patient encounter.

Further, it is difficult for doctors to inform patients of something they don’t know themselves, and doctors are frequently unaware of the cost of medications and other services they prescribe or order. A 2007 paper by G. Michael Allan, Joel Lexchin, and Natasha Wiebe found that “Physicians’ awareness of the cost of therapeutics is poor. With only 31% of estimates within 20% or 25% of the true drug cost and the median estimate 243% away from the true cost, many of the estimates appear to be wild guesses.” If physicians knew the cost of their prescriptions, they might prescribe differently in many cases, so it would be a huge step forward if both physicians and patients could be better informed about healthcare prices.

Physician Peter Ubel wrote a blog post about his experience with getting a prescription from his own doctor that was $200, much more than he had anticipated. When Ubel spoke with his doctor, the prescribing physician admitted he had no idea the prescription would cost so much. Ubel asks whether we should expect doctors to research costs before prescribing. It may be too much of a burden to ask doctors to do more research, but this may be a case where the move to electronic health records (EHRs) may benefit patients directly.

If an EHR retains patient insurance information, then it should be able to calculate the cost of any treatment stored in database and automatically display it to the doctor when the prescription is entered. With a really expansive system, it might even show the cost of alternative treatments. The doctor could then easily present the patient with each treatment and its cost.

I have serious reservations about the growth of EHRs and massive databases of personal information that is not easily controlled or limited; however, if we have EHRs anyway, we might as well use them to save money for patients. In the meantime, I think we will all do well to bring up the issue of cost with healthcare providers at every available opportunity. By doing so, we will make our providers aware that cost is an important consideration in prescribing, and we may also slowly work our way toward much greater transparency.

 

About ethicsbeyondcompliance

I hold a PhD in medical humanities with an major emphasis in ethics. I began teaching college-level ethics in 2000.
This entry was posted in bioethics, ethics and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Doctor, how much will this cost?

  1. keithnoback says:

    Not a bad idea. However, many factors other than line-item cost influence the economic decision-making of physicians and patients. Dosing frequency is one. Co-morbidity is another. Cost-shifting in the system is the most significant, however. For instance, the total annual cost of warfarin and thrombin inhibitors is just about the same, and the thrombin inhibitor is maybe a little safer. The thrombin inhibitor is an expensive medicine, paid for entirely by the patient’s pharmacy benefit plan. Warfarin is dirt cheap with an expensive monitoring program attached to it, the latter of which costs the drug plan nothing. Guess which drug patients end up taking? Even in cases where they are aware of the cost differential in treatments, physicians often choose more expensive options in spite of that knowledge.
    Diagnostics are another matter entirely. Often, you don’t know what you’re buying until it’s bought. Statistics can help, but statistics are purely retrospective and dependent on inclusion criteria. Great for common complaints and groups like “all males” but less so for the atypical complaint and complainant. Medicine is inherently wasteful. Our best move would be to decide how much we are willing to feed it, set that sum aside, and allocate within its boundaries. A single payer system is the only one that makes real economic sense.

    • Thanks for those excellent points. First, I agree wholeheartedly that we need a single-payer system. Also, I know that if a doctor brought up some of the considerations you mention, most patients will say, “You’re the doctor. What do you think is best?” In other cases, though, it really is a choice between an effective $10 prescription and a $200 prescription that offers no medical advantage that justifies the cost. I’m just glad to have these conversations at all.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s