Understanding and Addressing Patient and Provider Preferences Around Discussions of Cost of Breast Cancer Care

Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients over the age of 18 will be eligible for participation. All stages of disease will be included. Eligible participants will be approached in clinic. Those interested will provide written, informed consent at the time of their clinic visit. All participants will be asked to complete baseline surveys consisting of the InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well Being scale (IFDFW),[24] the Maximizer‐Minimizer Scale,[25] and a three question, 5‐point Likert scale survey about desire for cost information (1: How concerned are participants about the cost of their cancer care? 2: How interested are participants in discussing cost of care with their doctors? 3: How interested are participants in meeting with a financial counselor about the costs of their care?) Demographic information including age, race and ethnicity, marital status, number of children, current employment status of self and spouse, and education level will be included. To decrease participant burden and encourage study participation, only the three question survey will be required to be completed prior to the visit. The other survey components (IFDFW and Max‐Min Scale) can be completed after the visit, but prior to seeing a financial counselor. Participants will be offered a $10 giftcard of their choice (grocery store, Starbucks, Amazon, or gas) at each survey timepoint ($20 total) for participation. For this study, the investigators will use a pre and post design with 100 total participants. All visits will be audiorecorded, transcribed, and coded for whether cost was discussed in the control group and whether the intervention was successfully implemented in the intervention group as well as shared decision making using the observer‐OPTION scale. The first 50 patients will have usual care with providers conducting the visit in their typical manner. From our past studies, study team discusses cost in 15% of visits, though these discussion tend to be very superficial. The second group of 50 patients will be the intervention group where the providers will have a discussion of cost emphasizing five points: 1) Cancer care is expensive and it is normal to be concerned about cost. 2) The investigators will recommend treatments for the participants' cancer based on what the investigators think gives them the best chance of doing well, not based on the cost of the treatment. 3) Because of how complex our healthcare system is, it is very hard for their doctors to know what their costs will be, but the investigators will do our best to give participants some general information. 4) The investigators have resources available to help participants get more specific information so that participants can plan appropriately. 5) Do participants have any specific concerns about cost that participants would like to share with me? The investigators will encourage study team to have this discussion at the beginning of the consult, but the exact timing will be according to study team judgment. After the visit, all patients will complete a patient satisfaction survey and will be offered a referral to a financial counselor at our institution. Financial counseling will take place per our usual institutional protocols either in person or over the phone. Our financial counselors are aware that they may see an increased volume of patients during the study period and the investigators will provide funding to cover the increased need. Volume will be tracked during the study period and compared to the non‐study period and between the groups. At the first three to six‐month follow‐up visit with the surgeon, participants will again complete the IFDFW, a validated patient satisfaction scale[26], and the Satisfaction with Decision Scale.[27]. Data will have personal health identifiers removed from the data for the analysis portion of the study. PHI will not be reused without first seeking IRB approval. The investigators will enroll 100 patients in two consecutive groups of 50. This gives us 80% power with a two sided significance level of 0.05 for seeing a 27‐30% improvement (0.27‐0.3 higher score) in our primary outcome of financial well‐being as measured by the IFDFW in the intervention group at 3‐6 months after the initial visit; the average pre‐score on the IFDFW is 5.52 in past studies with improvements of 0.32‐1.18 seen in past studies of education interventions to improve financial well‐being.[24] This level of difference may not be achievable with this small study, but will provide data for powering a larger study. Maximizer‐Minimizer status, uptake of financial counseling, patient satisfaction, decision satisfaction, and demographic variables will be evaluated for associations with financial well‐being using logistic regression methods.