Literature DB >> 19691462

Eliciting individual preferences for health care: a case study of perinatal care.

Marjon van der Pol1, Alan Shiell, Flora Au, David Jonhston, Suzanne Tough.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate how a discrete choice experiment (DCE) can be used to elicit individuals' preferences for health care and how these preferences can be incorporated into a cost-benefit analysis.
METHODS: A DCE which elicited preferences for three perinatal services: specialist nurse appointments; home visits from a trained lay visitor; and home-help. Cost was included to obtain a monetary measure of the value that individuals place on the services. In total, 292 women who had previously participated in a randomized trial of alternative forms of pre-natal care were interviewed.
RESULTS: The most preferred service configuration consisted of three nurse appointments and two home visits before birth and 4 h of home-help per week for the first 4 weeks after birth. On average, women are willing to pay $371 for this package. A package that excluded home-help was valued at $122 whilst provision of three nurse appointments only was valued at $97. The predicted uptake of the services ranged from 37% to 93% depending on the woman's experience with the service, whether or not it was her first child and her level of education.
CONCLUSION: The willingness to pay values were much higher than the costs for nurse appointments, suggesting this service produces a net social benefit. The willingness to pay for the package including both the nurse appointments and home visits only just exceeded the costs of the package, suggesting there is a relatively high chance that this package produces a net social loss.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19691462      PMCID: PMC5060513          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00551.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  14 in total

1.  Public involvement in health care priority setting: an economic perspective.

Authors:  Tracy Roberts; Stirling Bryan; Chris Heginbotham; Alison McCallum
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation.

Authors:  M Ryan
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  Does supplementary prenatal nursing and home visitation reduce healthcare costs in the year after childbirth?

Authors:  Flora Au; Alan Shiell; Marjon van der Pol; David W Johnston; Suzanne Tough
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.187

4.  What influences participation in genetic carrier testing? Results from a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Jane Hall; Denzil G Fiebig; Madeleine T King; Ishrat Hossain; Jordan J Louviere
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2005-10-21       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Using discrete choice experiments within a cost-benefit analysis framework: some considerations.

Authors:  Emma McIntosh
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Using conjoint analysis to assess women's preferences for miscarriage management.

Authors:  M Ryan; J Hughes
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1997 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.046

7.  Rapid prenatal diagnostic testing for Down syndrome only or longer wait for full karyotype: the views of pregnant women.

Authors:  Mandy Ryan; Jane Diack; Verity Watson; Norman Smith
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.050

8.  A competency based approach to comprehensive pregnancy care.

Authors:  T R Johnson; M A Zettelmaier; P A Warner; R H Hayashi; M Avni; B Luke
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2000 Sep-Oct

9.  Prenatal and infancy home visitation by nurses: recent findings.

Authors:  D L Olds; C R Henderson; H J Kitzman; J J Eckenrode; R E Cole; R C Tatelbaum
Journal:  Future Child       Date:  1999 Spring-Summer

10.  Effect of prenatal and infancy nurse home visitation on government spending.

Authors:  D L Olds; C R Henderson; C Phelps; H Kitzman; C Hanks
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  8 in total

1.  Patient preferences for community pharmacy asthma services: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Pradnya Naik-Panvelkar; Carol Armour; John M Rose; Bandana Saini
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Michael D Clark; Domino Determann; Stavros Petrou; Domenico Moro; Esther W de Bekker-Grob
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  What, who and when? Incorporating a discrete choice experiment into an economic evaluation.

Authors:  Michela Tinelli; Mandy Ryan; Christine Bond
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2016-07-29

4.  Identifying and assessing the benefits of interventions for postnatal depression: a systematic review of economic evaluations.

Authors:  Binu Gurung; Louise J Jackson; Mark Monahan; Ruth Butterworth; Tracy E Roberts
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-05-21       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Influencing factors for prevention of postpartum hemorrhage and early detection of childbearing women at risk in Northern Province of Rwanda: beneficiary and health worker perspectives.

Authors:  Oliva Bazirete; Manassé Nzayirambaho; Aline Umubyeyi; Marie Chantal Uwimana; Marilyn Evans
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Exploring physician agency under demand-side cost sharing-An experimental approach.

Authors:  Ge Ge; Geir Godager; Jian Wang
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2022-04-03       Impact factor: 2.395

7.  Conjoint analyses of patients' preferences for primary care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Audrey Huili Lim; Sock Wen Ng; Xin Rou Teh; Su Miin Ong; Sheamini Sivasampu; Ka Keat Lim
Journal:  BMC Prim Care       Date:  2022-09-09

8.  Patients' valuation of the prescribing nurse in primary care: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Karen Gerard; Michela Tinelli; Sue Latter; Alesha Smith; Alison Blenkinsopp
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 3.377

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.