Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2007

Open Access 01-12-2007 | Research article

The effect of priority setting decisions for new cancer drugs on medical oncologists' practice in Ontario: a qualitative study

Authors: Scott R Berry, Stacey Hubay, Hagit Soibelman, Douglas K Martin

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Health care policies, including drug-funding policies, influence physician practice. Funding policies are especially important in the area of cancer care since cancer is a leading cause of death that is responsible for a significant level of health care expenditures. Recognizing the rising cost of cancer therapies, Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) established a funding process to provide access to new, effective agents through a "New Drug Funding Program" (NDFP). The purpose of this study is to describe oncologists' perceptions of the impact of NDFP priority setting decisions on their practice.

Methods

This is a qualitative study involving semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 46 medical oncologists in Ontario. Oncologists were asked to describe the impact of CCO's NDFP drug funding decisions on their practice. Analysis of interview transcripts commenced with data collection.

Results

Our key finding is that many of the medical oncologists who participated in this study did not accept limits when policy decisions limit access to cancer drugs they feel would benefit their patients. Moreover, overcoming those limits had a significant impact on oncologists' practice in terms of how they spend their time and energy and their relationship with patients.

Conclusion

When priority setting decisions limit access to cancer medications, many oncologists' efforts to overcome those limits have a significant impact on their practice. Policy makers need to seriously consider the implications of their decisions on physicians, who may go to considerable effort to circumvent their policies in the name of patient advocacy.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Greco PJ, Eisenberg JM: Changing Physicians' Practices. N Engl J Med. 1993, 329 (17): 1271-4. 10.1056/NEJM199310213291714.CrossRef Greco PJ, Eisenberg JM: Changing Physicians' Practices. N Engl J Med. 1993, 329 (17): 1271-4. 10.1056/NEJM199310213291714.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Eddy DM: Clinical policies and the quality of clinical practice. N Engl J Med. 1982, 307 (6): 343-7.CrossRef Eddy DM: Clinical policies and the quality of clinical practice. N Engl J Med. 1982, 307 (6): 343-7.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Canadian Cancer Society/National Cancer Institute of Canada: Canadian Cancer Statistics 2006. Toronto, Canada. 2006 Canadian Cancer Society/National Cancer Institute of Canada: Canadian Cancer Statistics 2006. Toronto, Canada. 2006
4.
go back to reference Moore R, Mao Y, Zhang J, Clarke K: Economic Burden of Illness in Canada. 1997, Ottawa: Health Canada Moore R, Mao Y, Zhang J, Clarke K: Economic Burden of Illness in Canada. 1997, Ottawa: Health Canada
5.
go back to reference Pater JL, Browman GP, Brouwers MC, Nefsky MF, Evans WK, Cowan DH: Funding new cancer drugs in Ontario: closing the loop in the practice guidelines development cycle. J Clin Oncol. 2001, 19 (14): 3392-6.CrossRef Pater JL, Browman GP, Brouwers MC, Nefsky MF, Evans WK, Cowan DH: Funding new cancer drugs in Ontario: closing the loop in the practice guidelines development cycle. J Clin Oncol. 2001, 19 (14): 3392-6.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Martin DK, Pater JL, Singer PA: Priority-setting decisions for new cancer drugs: a qualitative case study. Lancet. 2001, 358: 1676-1681. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06714-9.CrossRef Martin DK, Pater JL, Singer PA: Priority-setting decisions for new cancer drugs: a qualitative case study. Lancet. 2001, 358: 1676-1681. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06714-9.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Singer PA, Martin DK, Giacomini M, Purdy L: Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study. BMJ. 2000, 321 (7272): 1316-18. 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1316.CrossRef Singer PA, Martin DK, Giacomini M, Purdy L: Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study. BMJ. 2000, 321 (7272): 1316-18. 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1316.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Foy R, So J, Rous E, Scarffe JH: Perspectives of commissioners and cancer specialists in prioritising new cancer drugs: impact of the evidence threshold. BMJ. 1999, 318 (7181): 456-59.CrossRef Foy R, So J, Rous E, Scarffe JH: Perspectives of commissioners and cancer specialists in prioritising new cancer drugs: impact of the evidence threshold. BMJ. 1999, 318 (7181): 456-59.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Daniels N: Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ. 2000, 321 (7272): 1300-01. 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1300.CrossRef Daniels N: Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ. 2000, 321 (7272): 1300-01. 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1300.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Graham ID, Evans WK, Logan D, O'Connor A, Palda V, McAuley L, Brouwers M, Harrison MB: Canadian oncologists and clinical practice guidelines: a national survey of attitudes and reported use. Provincial Lung Disease Site Group of Cancer Care Ontario. Oncology. 2000, 59 (4): 283-90. 10.1159/000012184.CrossRef Graham ID, Evans WK, Logan D, O'Connor A, Palda V, McAuley L, Brouwers M, Harrison MB: Canadian oncologists and clinical practice guidelines: a national survey of attitudes and reported use. Provincial Lung Disease Site Group of Cancer Care Ontario. Oncology. 2000, 59 (4): 283-90. 10.1159/000012184.CrossRef
11.
12.
go back to reference Buckman R: Communication skills in palliative care: a practical guide. Neurol Clin. 2001, 19 (4): 989-1004. 10.1016/S0733-8619(05)70057-8.CrossRef Buckman R: Communication skills in palliative care: a practical guide. Neurol Clin. 2001, 19 (4): 989-1004. 10.1016/S0733-8619(05)70057-8.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Baile WF, Buckman R, Lenzi R, Glober G, Beale EA, Kudelka AP: SPIKES-A six-step protocol for delivering bad news: application to the patient with cancer. Oncologist. 2000, 5 (4): 302-11. 10.1634/theoncologist.5-4-302.CrossRef Baile WF, Buckman R, Lenzi R, Glober G, Beale EA, Kudelka AP: SPIKES-A six-step protocol for delivering bad news: application to the patient with cancer. Oncologist. 2000, 5 (4): 302-11. 10.1634/theoncologist.5-4-302.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Ladouceur R, Goulet F, Gagnon R, Boule R, Girard G, Jacques A, Frenette J, Carrier R: Breaking bad news: impact of a continuing medical education workshop. J Palliat Care. 2003, 19 (4): 238-45.CrossRef Ladouceur R, Goulet F, Gagnon R, Boule R, Girard G, Jacques A, Frenette J, Carrier R: Breaking bad news: impact of a continuing medical education workshop. J Palliat Care. 2003, 19 (4): 238-45.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Pearson SD: Caring and cost: the challenge for physician advocacy. Ann Intern Med. 2000, 133 (2): 148-53.CrossRef Pearson SD: Caring and cost: the challenge for physician advocacy. Ann Intern Med. 2000, 133 (2): 148-53.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The effect of priority setting decisions for new cancer drugs on medical oncologists' practice in Ontario: a qualitative study
Authors
Scott R Berry
Stacey Hubay
Hagit Soibelman
Douglas K Martin
Publication date
01-12-2007
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2007
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-7-193

Other articles of this Issue 1/2007

BMC Health Services Research 1/2007 Go to the issue