No abstract

Among insured nonelderly adults, there are appreciable disparities in health-care use by race and Hispanic ethnicity. Ethnic disparities in care are largely explained by differences in English fluency, but racial disparities in care are not explained by commonly used access factors.

consumer (DTC) advertising of prescription drugs in the United States totaled $3.2 billion in 2003. 1 Although expenditures may be leveling off, 2 DTC advertisements have become a stable, if controversial, feature of the media landscape. [3][4][5][6] Critics charge that DTC advertisements lead to overprescribing of unnecessary, expensive, and potentially harmful medications, while proponents counter that they can serve a useful educational function and help avert underuse of effective treatments for conditions that may be poorly recognized, highly stigmatized, or both. 7 Antidepressant medications consistently rank among the top DTC advertising categories. 8,9 Major depressive disorder (defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition as Ն5 depressive symptoms lasting at least 2 weeks and accompanied by functional impairment) 10 carries stigma, [11][12][13] is frequentlyFor editorial comment see p 2030.

IMPORTANCE Observational studies demonstrate links between patient-centered communication, quality of life (QOL), and aggressive treatments in advanced cancer, yet few randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of communication interventions have been reported. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a combined intervention involving oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and caregivers would promote patient-centered communication, and to estimate intervention effects on shared understanding, patient-physician relationships, QOL, and aggressive treatments in the last 30 days of life. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cluster RCT at community- and hospital-based cancer clinics in Western New York and Northern California; 38 medical oncologists (mean age 44.6 years; 11 (29%) female) and 265 community-dwelling adult patients with advanced nonhematologic cancer participated (mean age, 64.4 years, 146 [55.0%] female, 235 [89%] white; enrolled August 2012 to June 2014; followed for 3 years); 194 patients had participating caregivers. INTERVENTIONS Oncologists received individualized communication training using standardized patient instructors while patients received question prompt lists and individualized communication coaching to identify issues to address during an upcoming oncologist visit. Both interventions focused on engaging patients in consultations, responding to emotions, informing patients about prognosis and treatment choices, and balanced framing of information. Control participants received no training. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The prespecified primary outcome was a composite measure of patient-centered communication coded from audio recordings of the first oncologist visit following patient coaching (intervention group) or enrollment (control). Secondary outcomes included the patient-physician relationship, shared understanding of prognosis, QOL, and aggressive treatments and hospice use in the last 30 days of life. RESULTS Data from 38 oncologists (19 randomized to intervention) and 265 patients (130 intervention) were analyzed. In fully adjusted models, the intervention resulted in clinically and statistically significant improvements in the primary physician-patient communication end point (adjusted intervention effect, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.06–0.62; P = .02). Differences in secondary outcomes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A combined intervention that included oncologist communication training and coaching for patients with advanced cancer was effective in improving patient-centered communication but did not affect secondary outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01485627

No abstract

No abstract

In a nationally representative sample, higher patient satisfaction was associated with less emergency department use but with greater inpatient use, higher overall health care and prescription drug expenditures, and increased mortality.

Socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in health care quality have been extensively documented. Recently, the elimination of disparities in health care has become the focus of a national initiative. Yet, there is little effort to monitor and address disparities in health care through organizational quality improvement. After reviewing literature on disparities in health care, we discuss the limitations in existing quality assessment for identifying and addressing these disparities. We propose 5 principles to address these disparities through modifications in quality performance measures: disparities represent a significant quality problem; current data collection efforts are inadequate to identify and address disparities; clinical performance measures should be stratified by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position for public reporting; population-wide monitoring should incorporate adjustment for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position; and strategies to adjust payment for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position should be considered to reflect the known effects of both on morbidity. JAMA. 2000;283:2579-2584