Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Updated US Preventive Services Task Force Hepatitis B Screening Recommendations—Staying Committed

The Updated US Preventive Services Task Force Hepatitis B Screening Recommendations—Staying... Opinion Editorial with institutional review board approval (eg, based on rou- to assess patient screening or service use interventions rather tinely available clinical or administrative data). This ap- than drugs or devices. proach puts no burden on the participants and is similar to ob- In summary, Gabbard et al ethically and pragmatically servational studies, which do not typically obtain individual implemented Zelen’s design to document an intervention that informed consent. It is also more cost-effective to only obtain increased ACP use. Their ACP pathway appears to be repro- consent from those in the experimental group. ducible, scalable, and potentially economical. Engaging Notably, nearly half of the patients who were random- patients in ACP and obtaining appropriate reimbursement al- ized to the intervention arm declined study participation. We lows health care professionals to sustainably deliver high- would expect about the same or a higher rate of decline had quality, patient-centered care. The notable difference be- the control group been approached, which is the crux of the tween documentation and billing rates in the intervention ethical concern: should the control patients have explicitly pro- group highlights the continuing need to improve ACP work- vided consent? In this instance, the control group http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA Internal Medicine American Medical Association

The Updated US Preventive Services Task Force Hepatitis B Screening Recommendations—Staying Committed

Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/the-updated-us-preventive-services-task-force-hepatitis-b-screening-wWFsAoLk0a

References (18)

Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2020 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
2168-6106
eISSN
2168-6114
DOI
10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.7858
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Opinion Editorial with institutional review board approval (eg, based on rou- to assess patient screening or service use interventions rather tinely available clinical or administrative data). This ap- than drugs or devices. proach puts no burden on the participants and is similar to ob- In summary, Gabbard et al ethically and pragmatically servational studies, which do not typically obtain individual implemented Zelen’s design to document an intervention that informed consent. It is also more cost-effective to only obtain increased ACP use. Their ACP pathway appears to be repro- consent from those in the experimental group. ducible, scalable, and potentially economical. Engaging Notably, nearly half of the patients who were random- patients in ACP and obtaining appropriate reimbursement al- ized to the intervention arm declined study participation. We lows health care professionals to sustainably deliver high- would expect about the same or a higher rate of decline had quality, patient-centered care. The notable difference be- the control group been approached, which is the crux of the tween documentation and billing rates in the intervention ethical concern: should the control patients have explicitly pro- group highlights the continuing need to improve ACP work- vided consent? In this instance, the control group

Journal

JAMA Internal Medicine – American Medical Association

Published: Mar 15, 2021

There are no references for this article.