End-of-life medical treatment choices: Do survival chances and out-of-pocket costs matter?

Li Wei Chao, Jose Pagan, Beth J. Soldo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background. Out-of-pocket medical expenditures incurred prior to the death of a spouse could deplete savings and impoverish the surviving spouse. Little is known about the public's opinion as to whether spouses should forego such end-of-life (EOL) medical care to prevent asset depletion. Objectives. To analyze how elderly and near elderly adults assess hypothetical EOL medical treatment choices under different survival probabilities and out-of-pocket treatment costs. Methods. Survey data on a total of 1143 adults, with 589 from the Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old (AHEAD) and 554 from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), were used to study EOL cancer treatment recommendations for a hypothetical anonymous married woman in her 80s. Results. Respondents were more likely to recommend treatment when it was financed by Medicare than by the patient's own savings and when it had 60% rather than 20% survival probability. Black and male respondents were more likely to recommend treatment regardless of survival probability or payment source. Treatment uptake was related to the order of presentation of treatment options, consistent with starting point bias and framing effects. Conclusions. Elderly and near elderly adults would recommend that the hypothetical married woman should forego costly EOL treatment when the costs of the treatment would deplete savings. When treatment costs are covered by Medicare, respondents would make the recommendation to opt for care even if the probability of survival is low, which is consistent with moral hazard. The sequence of presentation of treatment options seems to affect patient treatment choice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)511-523
Number of pages13
JournalMedical Decision Making
Volume28
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2008

Fingerprint

Health Expenditures
Survival
Spouses
Health Care Costs
Therapeutics
Medicare
Public Opinion
Terminal Care
Retirement
Health
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • End-of-life care
  • Heuristics and biases
  • Medicare
  • Oncology
  • Willingness to pay

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

End-of-life medical treatment choices : Do survival chances and out-of-pocket costs matter? / Chao, Li Wei; Pagan, Jose; Soldo, Beth J.

In: Medical Decision Making, Vol. 28, No. 4, 07.2008, p. 511-523.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f8ad501013474fccb3aba146d546541e,
title = "End-of-life medical treatment choices: Do survival chances and out-of-pocket costs matter?",
abstract = "Background. Out-of-pocket medical expenditures incurred prior to the death of a spouse could deplete savings and impoverish the surviving spouse. Little is known about the public's opinion as to whether spouses should forego such end-of-life (EOL) medical care to prevent asset depletion. Objectives. To analyze how elderly and near elderly adults assess hypothetical EOL medical treatment choices under different survival probabilities and out-of-pocket treatment costs. Methods. Survey data on a total of 1143 adults, with 589 from the Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old (AHEAD) and 554 from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), were used to study EOL cancer treatment recommendations for a hypothetical anonymous married woman in her 80s. Results. Respondents were more likely to recommend treatment when it was financed by Medicare than by the patient's own savings and when it had 60{\%} rather than 20{\%} survival probability. Black and male respondents were more likely to recommend treatment regardless of survival probability or payment source. Treatment uptake was related to the order of presentation of treatment options, consistent with starting point bias and framing effects. Conclusions. Elderly and near elderly adults would recommend that the hypothetical married woman should forego costly EOL treatment when the costs of the treatment would deplete savings. When treatment costs are covered by Medicare, respondents would make the recommendation to opt for care even if the probability of survival is low, which is consistent with moral hazard. The sequence of presentation of treatment options seems to affect patient treatment choice.",
keywords = "End-of-life care, Heuristics and biases, Medicare, Oncology, Willingness to pay",
author = "Chao, {Li Wei} and Jose Pagan and Soldo, {Beth J.}",
year = "2008",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1177/0272989X07312713",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "511--523",
journal = "Medical Decision Making",
issn = "0272-989X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - End-of-life medical treatment choices

T2 - Do survival chances and out-of-pocket costs matter?

AU - Chao, Li Wei

AU - Pagan, Jose

AU - Soldo, Beth J.

PY - 2008/7

Y1 - 2008/7

N2 - Background. Out-of-pocket medical expenditures incurred prior to the death of a spouse could deplete savings and impoverish the surviving spouse. Little is known about the public's opinion as to whether spouses should forego such end-of-life (EOL) medical care to prevent asset depletion. Objectives. To analyze how elderly and near elderly adults assess hypothetical EOL medical treatment choices under different survival probabilities and out-of-pocket treatment costs. Methods. Survey data on a total of 1143 adults, with 589 from the Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old (AHEAD) and 554 from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), were used to study EOL cancer treatment recommendations for a hypothetical anonymous married woman in her 80s. Results. Respondents were more likely to recommend treatment when it was financed by Medicare than by the patient's own savings and when it had 60% rather than 20% survival probability. Black and male respondents were more likely to recommend treatment regardless of survival probability or payment source. Treatment uptake was related to the order of presentation of treatment options, consistent with starting point bias and framing effects. Conclusions. Elderly and near elderly adults would recommend that the hypothetical married woman should forego costly EOL treatment when the costs of the treatment would deplete savings. When treatment costs are covered by Medicare, respondents would make the recommendation to opt for care even if the probability of survival is low, which is consistent with moral hazard. The sequence of presentation of treatment options seems to affect patient treatment choice.

AB - Background. Out-of-pocket medical expenditures incurred prior to the death of a spouse could deplete savings and impoverish the surviving spouse. Little is known about the public's opinion as to whether spouses should forego such end-of-life (EOL) medical care to prevent asset depletion. Objectives. To analyze how elderly and near elderly adults assess hypothetical EOL medical treatment choices under different survival probabilities and out-of-pocket treatment costs. Methods. Survey data on a total of 1143 adults, with 589 from the Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old (AHEAD) and 554 from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), were used to study EOL cancer treatment recommendations for a hypothetical anonymous married woman in her 80s. Results. Respondents were more likely to recommend treatment when it was financed by Medicare than by the patient's own savings and when it had 60% rather than 20% survival probability. Black and male respondents were more likely to recommend treatment regardless of survival probability or payment source. Treatment uptake was related to the order of presentation of treatment options, consistent with starting point bias and framing effects. Conclusions. Elderly and near elderly adults would recommend that the hypothetical married woman should forego costly EOL treatment when the costs of the treatment would deplete savings. When treatment costs are covered by Medicare, respondents would make the recommendation to opt for care even if the probability of survival is low, which is consistent with moral hazard. The sequence of presentation of treatment options seems to affect patient treatment choice.

KW - End-of-life care

KW - Heuristics and biases

KW - Medicare

KW - Oncology

KW - Willingness to pay

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=47249102947&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=47249102947&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0272989X07312713

DO - 10.1177/0272989X07312713

M3 - Article

C2 - 18441252

AN - SCOPUS:47249102947

VL - 28

SP - 511

EP - 523

JO - Medical Decision Making

JF - Medical Decision Making

SN - 0272-989X

IS - 4

ER -