| Literature DB >> 16722600 |
Marie-Pierre Gagnon1, Emília Sánchez, Joan Mv Pons.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluating the impact of recommendations based upon health technology assessment (HTA) represents a challenge for both HTA agencies and healthcare policy-makers. Using a psychosocial theoretical framework, this study aimed at exploring the factors affecting physician intention to adopt HTA recommendations. The selected recommendations were prioritisation systems for patients on waiting lists for two surgical procedures: hip and knee replacement and cataract surgery.Entities:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16722600 PMCID: PMC1459199 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-1-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Implement Sci ISSN: 1748-5908 Impact factor: 7.327
Figure 1Theoretical Model Adapted from Triandis' Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour [22]
Internal consistency of theoretical constructs
| Construct | Number of items | Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) |
| Intention | 3 | 0.85 |
| Attitudinal beliefs | 7 | 0.81 |
| Personal normative beliefs | 6 | 0.86 |
| Social normative beliefs | 6 | 0.82 |
| Facilitating conditions | 3 | 0.75 |
| Habit | 4 | 0.87 |
Zero-order correlations between theoretical and sociodemographic variables
| Variable | Attitude | Personal norms | Social norms | Facilitating cond. | Habit | Age | Gender | Specialty | Experience |
| Intention | 0.715*** | 0.781*** | 0.716*** | 0.510*** | 0.677*** | 0.109 | -0.003 | -0.049 | 0.147 |
| Attitude | 0.664*** | 0.754*** | 0.500*** | 0.591*** | -0.046 | 0.035 | -0.303** | -0.038 | |
| Personal norms | 0.721*** | 0.424*** | 0.695*** | 0.044 | 0.093 | -0.241* | 0.063 | ||
| Social norms | 0.434*** | 0.666*** | -0.033 | 0.085 | -0.253* | -0.007 | |||
| Facilitating cond. | 0.422*** | -0.098 | 0.022 | -0.136 | -0.092 | ||||
| Habit | 0.106 | 0.020 | -0.196 | 0.135 | |||||
| Age | -0.283* | 0.422*** | 0.903*** | ||||||
| Gender | -0.436*** | -0.278** | |||||||
| Specialty | .0403*** |
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001
Sociodemographic and professional characteristics of respondents
| Variable | Medical specialty | Difference ( | |
| Ophthalmology | Orthopaedic surgery | ||
| Male (%) | 19 (54.3) | 51 (83.6) | χ2 = 15.20 |
| Female (%) | 9 (25.7) | 1 (1.6) | |
| Missing (%) | 7 (20.0) | 9 (14.8) | |
| < 30 years (%) | 10 (28.6) | 3 (4.9) | χ2 = 19.95 |
| 30 – 39 years (%) | 12 (34.3) | 9 (14.8) | |
| 40 – 49 years (%) | 8 (22.9) | 24 (39.3) | |
| ≥ 50 years (%) | 5 (14.3) | 25 (41.0) | |
| Mean | 11.0 | 18.7 | |
| Standard deviation | ± 8.4 | ± 8.8 | p < 0.001 |
a Two missing values
Main effect difference and differences in theoretical variables between medical specialties
| Theoretical variable | Ophthalmology (n = 35) Mean (sd) | Orthopaedic surgery (n = 61) Mean (sd) | F-test for univariate difference ( | |
| Intention | 3.59 (± 1.13) | 3.49 (± .87) | F = 0.23 ( | 0.63 |
| Attitudinal beliefs | 3.68 (± .65) | 3.23 (± .72) | F = 9.50 ( | 0.003 |
| Personal normative beliefs | 3.38 (± 1.14) | 2.91 (± .77) | F = 5.80 ( | 0.018 |
| Social normative beliefs | 3.38 (± .80) | 2.97 (± .74) | F = 6.43 ( | 0.013 |
| Facilitating conditions | 4.26 (± .75) | 3.59 (± 1.15) | F = 9.45 ( | 0.003 |
| Habit | 2.75 (± 1.24) | 2.31 (± .96) | F = 3.75 ( | 0.056 |
| Hotelling's Trace = 0.336 [F (6, 89) = 4.98; p < 0.0001] | ||||
* Considered significant at p < 0.05
Regression of the intention to use HTA recommendations for prioritisation of patients on waiting lists for cataract surgery
| Theoretical variable | Standard estimate (β) | |
| Attitudinal beliefs | 0.40 | 0.001 |
| Personal normative beliefs | 0.36 | 0.004 |
| Social normative beliefs | 0.25 | 0.044 |
| R2 of the model: 0.89 [F (3, 31) = 77.44; p < 0.001] ; Adjusted R2 = 0.87 | ||
* Considered significant at p < 0.05
Regression of the intention to use HTA recommendations for prioritisation of patients on waiting lists for hip and knee replacement
| Theoretical variable | Standard estimate (β) | |
| Facilitating conditions | 0.39 | 0.000 |
| Personal normative beliefs | 0.38 | 0.000 |
| Habit | 0.25 | 0.039 |
| R2 of the model: 0.66 [F (3, 57) = 37.40; p < 0.001] ; Adjusted R2 = 0.65 | ||
* Considered significant at p < 0.05