Literature DB >> 19085310

When is choice a good thing? An experimental study of the impact of choice on patient outcomes.

Jane Ogden1, Emma Daniells, Julie Barnett.   

Abstract

Although policy emphasises the benefits of choice, an increasing body of work points to times when choice may not always have positive consequences. The present experimental study aimed to explore the impact of choice on a number of patient outcomes in the health care setting. The study also explored the extent to which the influence of choice was affected by patient uncertainty and anticipated regret. Choice was conceptualised as consisting of two dimensions: 'having choice' which reflects the availability of a number of options and 'making choice' reflecting resolution and a desire for a choice to be made. Consecutive patients (n = 427) from four General Practices in Surrey were asked to read one of 16 vignettes which varied in terms of four independent variables (having choice, making choice, uncertainty, anticipated regret) and to rate items relating to four outcome variables (patient satisfaction, perceived control, negative emotions, information seeking). The results showed that having more choice was consistently associated with more positive patient outcomes than having no choice. Having no choice was particularly detrimental for those experiencing anticipated regret and uncertainty. In contrast, whether or not a choice was made had no impact upon any of the outcome measures. In line with current policy having choice in the health care setting is related to improved patient outcomes. The results provide some insights into the factors which influence the direction of the impact of choice. They also indicate the importance of differentiating between 'having choice' and 'making choice'.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19085310     DOI: 10.1080/13548500802069006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Health Med        ISSN: 1354-8506            Impact factor:   2.423


  5 in total

1.  The value of choice: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Julie Barnett; Jane Ogden; Emma Daniells
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  The value of choice: development of a new measurement tool.

Authors:  Jane Ogden; Emma Daniells; Julie Barnett
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Value of freedom to choose encoded by the human brain.

Authors:  Juri Fujiwara; Nobuo Usui; Soyoung Q Park; Tony Williams; Toshio Iijima; Masato Taira; Ken-ichiro Tsutsui; Philippe N Tobler
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Understanding Health Information Seeking from an Actor-Centric Perspective.

Authors:  Simon Batchelor; Linda Waldman; Gerry Bloom; Sabrina Rasheed; Nigel Scott; Tanvir Ahmed; Nazib Uz Zaman Khan; Tamanna Sharmin
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Acceptance of COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccine Co-Administration: Insights from a Representative Italian Survey.

Authors:  Alexander Domnich; Riccardo Grassi; Elettra Fallani; Roberto Ciccone; Bianca Bruzzone; Donatella Panatto; Allegra Ferrari; Marco Salvatore; Maura Cambiaggi; Alessandro Vasco; Andrea Orsi; Giancarlo Icardi
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-01-20
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.