Literature DB >> 18937994

Examining the attitudes and preferences of health care decision-makers in relation to access, equity and cost-effectiveness: a discrete choice experiment.

Julie Ratcliffe1, Hilary L Bekker, Paul Dolan, Richard Edlin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe the views of health care decision-makers and providers operating in the UK National Health Service (NHS) concerning the concepts of cost-effectiveness, equity and access through a series of attitudinal questions; to evaluate the preferences of health care providers in relation to each of these concepts using a discrete choice experiment (DCE); to assess the impact of prior completion of an attitude questionnaire on preferences elicited through a DCE.
METHOD: Three versions of a DCE questionnaire were developed with and without a series of attitudinal questions and randomly distributed to 1456 health care decision-makers and providers. The questionnaire sought to elicit their preferences between the competing objectives of cost-effectiveness, equity and access within the context of different hypothetical, specialist treatment programmes for cardiovascular disease.
RESULTS: The response rate was 26%. Female respondents exhibited a stronger preference than males for reducing health inequalities by targeting the worst off (Wald test, P<0.001). Primary Care Trusts (PCTs), Strategic Health Authorities (SHA) or Department of Health (DoH) staff were also more likely than hospital managers to favour programmes that targeted the worst off (Wald test, P<0.001 in each case). Those who were clinically trained and currently in a clinical post had a stronger preference for programmes with shorter waiting times compared to those in a managerial or non-clinical posts, who exhibited stronger preferences for equity. Completion of a series of attitudinal questions prior to completing the DCE task resulted in a lower proportion of dominant responses and an increased willingness to make trade-offs between attributes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18937994     DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2008.09.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Policy        ISSN: 0168-8510            Impact factor:   2.980


  11 in total

1.  Not at issue.

Authors:  Clive E Adams
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2012-01-18       Impact factor: 9.306

2.  Comparative analysis of decision maker preferences for equity/efficiency attributes in reimbursement decisions in three European countries.

Authors:  Petra Baji; Manuel García-Goñi; László Gulácsi; Emmanouil Mentzakis; Francesco Paolucci
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2015-08-22

3.  Choosing vs. allocating: discrete choice experiments and constant-sum paired comparisons for the elicitation of societal preferences.

Authors:  Chris D Skedgel; Allan J Wailoo; Ron L Akehurst
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Analysing coverage decision-making: opening Pandora's box?

Authors:  Katharina Elisabeth Fischer; Reiner Leidl
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2014-02-06

5.  Challenges and opportunities for policy decisions to address health equity in developing health systems: case study of the policy processes in the Indian state of Orissa.

Authors:  Saji S Gopalan; Satyanarayan Mohanty; Ashis Das
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2011-11-18

6.  How much might a society spend on life-saving interventions at different ages while remaining cost-effective? A case study in a country with detailed data.

Authors:  Giorgi Kvizhinadze; Nick Wilson; Nisha Nair; Melissa McLeod; Tony Blakely
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2015-07-08

Review 7.  HOSPITAL MANAGERS' NEED FOR INFORMATION ON HEALTH TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS.

Authors:  Anne Mette Ølholm; Kristian Kidholm; Mette Birk-Olsen; Janne Buck Christensen
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 2.188

8.  Prioritising health service innovation investments using public preferences: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Seda Erdem; Carl Thompson
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Parents' preferences for vaccinating daughters against human papillomavirus in the Netherlands: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Robine Hofman; Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Hein Raat; Theo J M Helmerhorst; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Ida J Korfage
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Hospital preferences of nursing students in Korea: a discrete choice experiment approach.

Authors:  Bo-Hyun Park; YuKyung Ko
Journal:  Hum Resour Health       Date:  2016-09-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.