OBJECTIVE: The aim was to develop a priority scoring system for patients on waiting lists for joint replacement based on a wide social participation, and to analyze the differences among participants. METHODS: Conjoint analysis. Focus groups in combination with a nominal technique were employed to identify the priority criteria (N=36). A rank-ordered logit model was then applied for scoring estimations. Participants (N=860) represented: consultants, allied-health professionals, patients and their relatives, and the general population of Catalonia. RESULTS: Clinical and social criteria were selected, and their relative importance (over 100 points) was: pain (33), difficulty in doing activities of daily living (21), disease severity (18), limitations on ability to work (10), having someone to look after the patient (9), being a caregiver (6), and recovery probability (4). Estimated criteria coefficients had the expected positive sign and all were statistically significant (P < 0.001). There were differences between groups; pain was rated higher by patients/relatives, and difficulty in doing activities was rated lower by patients/relatives and the general public. Most interaction terms for these criteria and groups were significant (P < 0.001). Consultants and allied-health professionals had the most similar prioritization pattern (r=0.97). CONCLUSION: Both clinical and social criteria are considered for prioritization of joint replacement surgery from a wide social perspective. The preference among professional and social groups varies and this might impact the result of patient prioritization. A wide social participation for obtaining adequate prioritizing systems for patients on waiting lists is desirable.
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to develop a priority scoring system for patients on waiting lists for joint replacement based on a wide social participation, and to analyze the differences among participants. METHODS: Conjoint analysis. Focus groups in combination with a nominal technique were employed to identify the priority criteria (N=36). A rank-ordered logit model was then applied for scoring estimations. Participants (N=860) represented: consultants, allied-health professionals, patients and their relatives, and the general population of Catalonia. RESULTS: Clinical and social criteria were selected, and their relative importance (over 100 points) was: pain (33), difficulty in doing activities of daily living (21), disease severity (18), limitations on ability to work (10), having someone to look after the patient (9), being a caregiver (6), and recovery probability (4). Estimated criteria coefficients had the expected positive sign and all were statistically significant (P < 0.001). There were differences between groups; pain was rated higher by patients/relatives, and difficulty in doing activities was rated lower by patients/relatives and the general public. Most interaction terms for these criteria and groups were significant (P < 0.001). Consultants and allied-health professionals had the most similar prioritization pattern (r=0.97). CONCLUSION: Both clinical and social criteria are considered for prioritization of joint replacement surgery from a wide social perspective. The preference among professional and social groups varies and this might impact the result of patient prioritization. A wide social participation for obtaining adequate prioritizing systems for patients on waiting lists is desirable.
Authors: Daniel Pérez Fentes; Carlos Fernández Baltar; Juan Núñez Otero; Rita Diz Gil; Francisco Gude Sampedro Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2021-03-11
Authors: Alejandro Allepuz; Mireia Espallargues; Montse Moharra; Mercè Comas; Joan M V Pons Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2008-04-08 Impact factor: 2.655