Literature DB >> 19725018

Willingness-to-pay to avoid the time spent and discomfort associated with screening colonoscopy.

Daniel E Jonas1, Louise B Russell, Jon Chou, Michael Pignone.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The screening colonoscopy process requires a considerable amount of time and some discomfort for patients.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to use willingness-to-pay (WTP) to value the time required and the discomfort associated with screening colonoscopy. In addition, we aimed to explore some of the differences between and potential uses of the WTP and the human capital methods.
METHODS: Subjects completed a diary recording time and a questionnaire including WTP questions to value the time and discomfort associated with colonoscopy. We also valued the elapsed time reported in the diaries (but not the discomfort) using the human capital method.
RESULTS: 110 subjects completed the study. Mean WTP to avoid the time and discomfort was $263. Human capital values for elapsed time were greater. Linear regressions showed that WTP was influenced most by the difficulty of the preparation, which added $147 to WTP (p=0.03).
CONCLUSIONS: WTP values to avoid the time and discomfort associated with the screening colonoscopy process were substantially lower than most of the human capital values for elapsed time alone. The human capital method may overestimate the value of time in situations that involve an irregular, episodic series of time intervals, such as preparation for or recovery after colonoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19725018      PMCID: PMC4174545          DOI: 10.1002/hec.1545

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  48 in total

1.  Benefit evaluation of mass screening for prostate cancer: willingness-to-pay measurement using contingent valuation.

Authors:  Hideo Yasunaga; Hiroo Ide; Tomoaki Imamura; Kazuhiko Ohe
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Willingness to pay for drug abuse treatment: results from a contingent valuation study in Taiwan.

Authors:  Chao-Hsiun Tang; Jin-Tan Liu; Ching-Wen Chang; Wen-Ying Chang
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2006-11-03       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  Willingness to pay for cataract surgery in rural Southern China.

Authors:  Mingguang He; Vicki Chan; Elaine Baruwa; Donna Gilbert; Kevin D Frick; Nathan Congdon
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2007-01-02       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  Long-term treatment costs associated with implant-supported mandibular prostheses in edentulous patients.

Authors:  Nikolai J Attard; George A Zarb; Audrey Laporte
Journal:  Int J Prosthodont       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.681

5.  A willingness-to-pay assessment of parents' preference for shorter duration treatment of acute otitis media in children.

Authors:  Delphine Gueylard Chenevier; Jacques LeLorier
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Willingness to pay for inhaled insulin: a contingent valuation approach.

Authors:  Hamid Sadri; Linda D MacKeigan; Lawrence A Leiter; Thomas R Einarson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Patients' willingness to pay for electronic communication with their general practitioner.

Authors:  Trine Strand Bergmo; Silje Camilla Wangberg
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2006-12-21

8.  Costs of rheumatoid arthritis: new estimates from the human capital method and comparison to the willingness-to-pay method.

Authors:  Bruno Fautrel; Ann E Clarke; Francis Guillemin; Viviane Adam; Yvan St-Pierre; Tina Panaritis; Paul R Fortin; Henri A Menard; Cam Donaldson; John R Penrod
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Willingness to pay for reduced incontinence symptoms.

Authors:  M Johannesson; R M O'Conor; G Kobelt-Nguyen; A Mattiasson
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1997-10

10.  Willingness to pay for avoiding coronary restenosis and repeat revascularization: results from a contingent valuation study.

Authors:  Dan Greenberg; Ameet Bakhai; Peter J Neumann; David J Cohen
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.980

View more
  6 in total

1.  Emotions and scope effects in the monetary valuation of health.

Authors:  María V Avilés Blanco; Raúl Brey; Jorge Araña; José Luis Pinto Prades
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2017-03-24

2.  Daily hassles' role in health seeking behavior among low-income populations.

Authors:  Rebekah Jacob; Lauren D Arnold; Jean Hunleth; K Allen Greiner; Aimee S James
Journal:  Am J Health Behav       Date:  2014-03

Review 3.  Non-medical costs of colonoscopy.

Authors:  Paweł W Petryszyn; Radosław Kempiński; Jerzy Michałowicz; Elżbieta Poniewierka
Journal:  Prz Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-10-19

4.  The effect of online meeting and health screening on business travel: A stated preference case study in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Tiantian Chen; Xiaowen Fu; David A Hensher; Zhi-Chun Li; N N Sze
Journal:  Transp Res E Logist Transp Rev       Date:  2022-07-09       Impact factor: 10.047

5.  Economic evaluation of process utility: elucidating preferences for a non-invasive procedure to treat restenosis.

Authors:  Maria V Aviles-Blanco
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2021-07-23

6.  Using willingness-to-pay to establish patient preferences for cancer testing in primary care.

Authors:  Sandra Hollinghurst; Jonathan Banks; Lin Bigwood; Fiona M Walter; Willie Hamilton; Tim J Peters
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 2.796

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.