The Patient Experience of Prior Authorization for Cancer Care

JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Oct 2;6(10):e2338182. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.38182.

Abstract

Importance: Prior authorization (PA) requires clinicians and patients to navigate a complex approval pathway. Resultant delays and denials can be particularly problematic for patients with cancer, who often need urgent treatment or symptom management.

Objective: To investigate the patient perspective of PA for cancer-related care, including perceptions about the process, outcomes (including delays and denials), and patient administrative burden.

Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional, anonymous survey used a convenience sample of patients with PA experience. Participants were recruited using social media and email lists of US-based cancer advocacy organizations from July 1 to October 6, 2022.

Exposure: Prior authorization for any cancer-related service.

Main outcomes and measures: Delays to care, outcome of PA, communication, and changes in anxiety (measured on a scale of 0-100, with 0 indicating no anxiety and higher scores indicating higher levels of anxiety) and trust.

Results: Of 178 respondents (158 women [88%], 151 non-Hispanic White respondents [84%], 164 respondents [92%] <65 years), 112 (63%) reported that their cancer care was approved and given as recommended, and 39 (22%) did not receive recommended care due to delays or denials. Most respondents (123 [69%]) reported a PA-related delay in care; of those with delayed care, 90 (73%) reported a delay of 2 or more weeks. Most respondents (119 [67%]) had to personally become involved in the PA process; 35 (20%) spent 11 or more hours dealing with PA issues. Overall, the PA experience was rated as bad (70 [40%]) or horrible (55 of 174 [32%]); ratings were associated with the length of delay (ρ = 0.36; P < .001) and the time spent on PA (ρ = 0.42; P < .001). Self-reported PA-related anxiety was higher than usual anxiety (mean [SD] score, 74.7 [20.2] vs 37.5 [22.6]; P < .001) and was correlated with delay length (ρ = 0.16; P = .04), time spent on PA (ρ = 0.27; P < .001), and overall PA experience (ρ = 0.34; P < .001). After PA, 159 respondents (89%) trusted their insurance company less, and 148 respondents (83%) trusted the health care system less. Patient involvement in the PA process was associated with increased odds of distrusting their insurance company (β = 6.0; 95% CI, 1.9-19.2) and the health care system (β = 3.3; 95% CI, 1.4-8.1) and of having a negative experience (β = 6.6; 95% CI, 3.1-14.3).

Conclusions and relevance: This survey-based cross-sectional study of the patient experience with PA highlights an adverse outcome of PA: 22% of patients did not receive the care recommended by their treatment team because of PA. Most respondents experienced a delay in recommended oncology care, and delays were associated with increased anxiety, a negative perception of the PA process, and patient administrative burden.

Publication types

  • Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

MeSH terms

  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Neoplasms* / therapy
  • Patient Outcome Assessment
  • Prior Authorization*
  • Surveys and Questionnaires