TY - JOUR T1 - Does cost feedback modify demand for common blood tests in secondary care? A prospective controlled intervention study JF - Future Healthcare Journal JO - Future Healthc J SP - 204 LP - 208 DO - 10.7861/fhj.2019-0001 VL - 6 IS - 3 AU - Sarah Lewis AU - Ben Young AU - Peter Thurley AU - Dominick Shaw AU - Jo Cranwell AU - Rob Skelly AU - Tessa Langley AU - Mark Norwood AU - Nigel DC Sturrock AU - Andrew W Fogarty Y1 - 2019/10/01 UR - http://www.rcpjournals.org/content/6/3/204.abstract N2 - Background Behavioural insights or ‘nudge’ theory suggests that non-directional interventions may be used to modify human behaviour. We have tested the hypothesis that the provision of the cost of common blood tests with their results may modify subsequent demand for blood assays.Methods The study design was a prospective controlled intervention study. The individual and annual institutional cost of full blood count (FBC), urea and electrolytes (U&E) and liver function test (LFT) blood assays were added to the electronic results system for inpatients at the intervention teaching hospital, but not the control hospital.Results In the 12 months after the intervention was implemented, demand for FBC dropped by 3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 1–5; p<0.001), U&E by 2% (95% CI 0–4; p=0.054) and there was no change in demand for LFT compared to the control institution.Conclusions Providing cost feedback to clinicians for commonly used blood tests is a viable intervention that is associated with small reductions in demand for some, but not all blood assays. As this is an easily scalable approach, this has potential to enable efficient healthcare delivery, while also minimising the morbidity experienced by the patient. ER -