Association Between Reimbursement Incentives and Physician Practice in Oncology

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Significant controversy exists regarding whether physicians factor personal financial considerations into their clinical decision making. Within oncology, several reimbursement policies may incentivize physicians to increase health care use.OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether the financial incentives presented by oncology reimbursement policies affect physician practice patterns.EVIDENCE REVIEW Studies evaluating an association between reimbursement incentives and changes in reimbursement policy on oncology care delivery were reviewed. Articles were identified systematically by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Proquest Health Management, Econlit, and Business Source Premier. English-language articles focused on the US health care system that made empirical estimates of the association between a measurement of physician reimbursement/compensation and a measurement of delivery of cancer treatment services were included. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool was used to assess risk of bias. There were no date restrictions on the publications, and literature searches were finalized on February 14, 2018.FINDINGS Eighteen studies were included. All were observational cohort studies, and most had a moderate risk of bias. Heterogeneity of reimbursement policies and outcomes precluded meta-analysis; therefore, a qualitative synthesis was performed. Most studies (15 of 18 [83%]) reported an association between reimbursement and care delivery consistent with physician responsiveness to financial incentives, although such an association was not identified in all studies. Findings consistently suggested that self-referral arrangements may increase use of radiotherapy and that profitability of systemic anticancer agents may affect physicians' choice of drug. Findings were less conclusive as to whether profitability of systemic anticancer therapy affects the decision of whether to use any systemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCETo date, this study is the first systematic review of reimbursement policy and clinical care delivery in oncology. The findings suggest that some oncologists may, in certain circumstances, alter treatment recommendations based on personal revenue considerations. An implication of this finding is that value-based reimbursement policies may be a useful tool to better align physician incentives with patient need and increase the value of oncology care.

Determinants of surgeon referral and radiation therapy receipt following breast conservation among older women with early-stage breast cancer

“…The absence of physician practice change in response to a new nancial incentive departs from much, but not all, of the prior literature in oncology [23,24,12,25]. It is therefore important to understand the context in which this nding may apply.…”

Use of High-Cost Cancer Treatments in Academic and Nonacademic Practice

“…That financial incentives may influence cancer treatment decisions would not be a new finding . However, few studies have analyzed the use of cancer drugs with respect to the financial incentives in place since the significant changes made by the Medicare Modernization Act during 2005 and 2006.…”

Why individual‐level interventions are not enough: Systems‐level determinants of oral anticancer medication adherence

“…The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services currently reimburses Part B drugs, such as intravenous or injected oncolytics, administered by a health provider proportionally to the cost of the drugs 44,45 . This reimbursement model has been shown to increase utilization of more expensive oncolytics 46 .…”