Sunshine Act in the dark

Background This study assessed patient perceptions of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act and opinions toward physicians who receive gifts and/or payments from pharmaceutical or medical device companies. Methods During their office visit, patients attending different specialty clinics volunteered to complete our survey. The survey asks if the patient knows what the Sunshine Act is, then asks questions on 5-point response scales to assess the patient's opinions toward physicians who receive compensation from companies, their self-rated knowledge of physician compensation, and how they believe this compensation affects the cost of care. Results Over 13 months, 523 responses were collected: 8.6% of patients reported having knowledge of the Sunshine Act, 56.8% rated their knowledge of physician compensations as “poor,” and 67.1% agreed with the statement that patients should be aware of the compensation physicians receive. When asked how their opinion toward their physician would change if they learned the physician received free meals or gifts from companies, 58.9% replied “not at all,” and 36.11% of patients did not believe their cost of care would increase if their physician received compensation from companies. Conclusions Most patients were unfamiliar with the Sunshine Act, and believe their knowledge of physician compensation is poor. Over half of the respondents would not change their opinion of their physician based on knowledge of their physician receiving payments/gifts from companies, and over one-third of respondents did not believe such compensation increased the cost of care. The majority of respondents agreed that patients should be aware of payments/gifts to physicians.

Barriers to implementing childbirth recommendations in Brazil: the women’s perspective

Objectives. To identify barriers to the implementation of National Childbirth Guidelines in Brazil from the women’s perspective. Methods. A descriptive exploratory study was performed using a qualitative approach and an interpretive perspective. The hermeneutic unit of analysis was established based on the contribution of users to a public online consultation about the National Childbirth Guidelines in Brazil, performed in 2016 by the National Committee for Health Technology Incorporation into the Unified Health System (CONITEC). Content analysis techniques were used to examine the answers provided to the following specific question: “Considering your local reality, what would hinder the implementation of this protocol or guideline?” Results. Of 396 contributions recorded by CONITEC, 55 were included in the content analysis. The mean age of women was 31 years, with most self-declared as white (69%) and living in the Southeast of Brazil (56.3%). Coding revealed seven barrier categories, which were grouped into three families — barriers related to 1) professional training and culture (which highlighted the centrality of physicians, not women, in childbirth), 2) social culture (general population not well informed), and 3) political and management issues (little interest on the part of managers, lower physician compensation for vaginal childbirth vs. cesarian section, and poor hospital infrastructure). Conclusions. Aspects of professional training and culture, social culture, and political as well as management issues are critical points to be considered in future interventions aiming at overcoming or weakening the barriers to implementing childbirth recommendations in Brazil.

Recent Trends and Potential Drivers of Non-invasive Cardiovascular Imaging Use in the United States of America and England

Background: Non-invasive Cardiovascular imaging (NICI), including cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging provides important information to guide the management of patients with cardiovascular conditions. Current rates of NICI use and potential policy determinants in the United States of America (US) and England remain unexplored.Methods: We compared NICI activity in the US (Medicare fee-for-service, 2011–2015) and England (National Health Service, 2012–2016). We reviewed recommendations related to CMR from Clinical Practice Guidelines, Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC), and Choosing Wisely. We then categorized recommendations according to whether CMR was the only recommended NICI technique (substitutable indications). Reimbursement policies in both settings were systematically collated and reviewed using publicly available information.Results: The 2015 rate of NICI activity in the US was 3.1 times higher than in England (31,055 vs. 9,916 per 100,000 beneficiaries). The proportion of CMR of all NICI was small in both jurisdictions, but nuclear cardiac imaging was more frequent in the US in absolute and relative terms. American and European CPGs were similar, both in terms of number of recommendations and proportions of indications where CMR was not the only recommended NICI technique (substitutable indications). Reimbursement schemes for NICI activity differed for physicians and hospitals between the two settings.Conclusions: Fee-for-service physician compensation in the US for NICI may contribute to higher NICI activity compared to England where physicians are salaried. Reimbursement arrangements for the performance of the test may contribute to the higher proportion of nuclear cardiac imaging out of the total NICI activity. Differences in CPG recommendations appear not to explain the variation in NICI activity between the US and England.