1Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Phoenix, Arizona.
2National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2020 Jul;18(7):825-831. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7538.
Financial distress from medical treatment is an increasing concern. Healthcare organizations may have different levels of organizational commitment, existing programs, and expected outcomes of screening and management of patient financial distress.
In November 2018, representatives from 17 (63%) of the 27 existing NCCN Member Institutions completed an online survey. The survey focused on screening and management practices for patient financial distress, perceived barriers in implementation, and leadership attitudes about such practices. Due to the lack of a validated questionnaire in this area, survey questions were generated after a comprehensive literature search and discussions among the study team, including NCCN Best Practices Committee representatives.
Responses showed that 76% of centers routinely screened for financial distress, mostly with social worker assessment (94%), and that 56% screened patients multiple times. All centers offered programs to help with drug costs, meal or gas vouchers, and payment plans. Charity care was provided by 100% of the large centers (≥10,000 unique annual patients) but none of the small centers that responded (<10,000 unique annual patients; P=.008). Metrics to evaluate the impact of financial advocacy services included number of patients assisted, bad debt/charity write-offs, or patient satisfaction surveys. The effectiveness of institutional practices for screening and management of financial distress was reported as poor/very poor by 6% of respondents. Inadequate staffing and resources, limited budget, and lack of reimbursement were potential barriers in the provision of these services. A total of 94% agreed with the need for better integration of financial advocacy into oncology practice.
Three-fourths of NCCN Member Institutions reported screening and management programs for financial distress, although the actual practices and range of services vary. Information from this study can help centers benchmark their performance relative to similar programs and identify best practices in this area.
医疗费用导致的财务困境日益受到关注。医疗机构可能具有不同水平的组织承诺、现有计划以及对患者财务困境筛查和管理的预期结果。
2018 年 11 月,27 家现有 NCCN 成员机构中的 17 家(63%)的代表完成了一项在线调查。该调查侧重于患者财务困境的筛查和管理实践、实施过程中的感知障碍,以及领导层对这些实践的态度。由于在该领域缺乏经过验证的问卷,因此在研究团队(包括 NCCN 最佳实践委员会代表)进行全面文献检索和讨论后,生成了调查问题。
调查结果显示,76%的中心常规筛查财务困境,主要通过社会工作者评估(94%),56%的中心多次筛查患者。所有中心都提供药物费用、餐券或加油券以及付款计划方面的援助计划。100%的大型中心(≥10000 名独特年度患者)提供慈善护理,但没有一家回复的小型中心(<10000 名独特年度患者;P=.008)。用于评估财务倡导服务影响的指标包括援助患者的人数、坏账/慈善注销额或患者满意度调查。6%的受访者报告机构筛查和管理财务困境的实践效果不佳/非常差。人员配备和资源不足、预算有限以及缺乏报销是提供这些服务的潜在障碍。共有 94%的受访者同意需要更好地将财务倡导纳入肿瘤学实践。
四分之三的 NCCN 成员机构报告了财务困境的筛查和管理计划,但实际做法和服务范围有所不同。本研究的信息可以帮助中心相对于类似计划来衡量其绩效,并确定该领域的最佳实践。