Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Medical Treatment

Physician Survey. The purpose of this survey was to understand their perspective and experience in making cost-effectiveness decisions in clinical practice.

A written survey was mailed in June to 1,000 randomly-selected physicians in the five counties of Sacramento, Yolo, El Dorado, Placer and Nevada.
Over 500 surveys were returned for a 52% response rate. In its December issue, the Western Journal of Medicine published an article that describes the project and includes the survey results.

Discussions with consumers. The goal of these discussions was to identify consumer views and values about how decisions should be made when healthcare providers consider the use of medical treatments that have marginal benefit at great cost.

The project conducted 25 small-group discussions with the public between November 2000 and February 2001. Using an interactive discussion format, Visible Fairness challenged 260 individuals to consider some of the priority conflicts facing patients, consumers, and citizens. Meetings were held in workplace and faith settings, individuals' homes, classrooms, and community organizations.

• Consumer Phone Survey. A 500-person phone survey was conducted in April 2001 to identify how a random sampling of the public views the issue of the rising cost of healthcare and reactions to various cost-containment strategies. Contact SHD if you would like a copy of the survey results.
• Balancing Act Forum. On June 6, 260 individuals representing a variety of healthcare interests attended a half-day forum in Sacramento on the results of the Visible Fairness to date. Statewide healthcare leaders discussed the results in a provocative panel discussion
• Final Report.
Later this summer, the Visible Fairness Steering Committee will prepare its final recommendations on whether and how cost-benefit trade-offs can be incorporated into clinical and coverage decisions. If you would like a copy of the final report, contact SHD.