Literature DB >> 23809234

Assessing patient preferences for the delivery of different community-based models of care using a discrete choice experiment.

Simon Dixon1, Susan A Nancarrow2, Pamela M Enderby1, Anna M Moran3, Stuart G Parker1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess patient preferences for different models of care defined by location of care, frequency of care and principal carer within community-based health-care services for older people.
DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment administered within a face-to-face interview.
SETTING: An intermediate care service in a large city within the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: The projected sample size was calculated to be 200; however, 77 patients were recruited to the study. The subjects had recently been discharged from hospital and were living at home and were receiving short-term care by a publicly funded intermediate care service.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The degree of preference, measured using single utility score, for individual service characteristics presented within a series of potential care packages.
RESULTS: Location of care was the dominant service characteristics with care at home being the strongly stated preference when compared with outpatient care (0.003), hospital care (<0.001) and nursing home care (<0.001) relative to home care, although this was less pronounced among less sick patients. Additionally, the respondents indicated a dislike for very frequent care contacts. No particular type of professional carer background was universally preferred but, unsurprisingly, there was evidence that sick patients showed a preference for nurse-led care.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients have clear preferences for the location for their care and were able to state preferences between different care packages when their ideal service was not available. Service providers can use this information to assess which models of care are most preferred within resource constraints.
© 2013 Crown copyright. Health Expectations © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  allied health; assistants; community rehabilitation services; conjoint analysis; intermediate care; models of care; outcomes; patient preference; staff; support workers

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23809234      PMCID: PMC5060844          DOI: 10.1111/hex.12096

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


  17 in total

1.  Nurses and assistive personnel. Do patients know the difference?

Authors:  J C Lange; E C Polifroni
Journal:  J Nurs Adm       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 1.737

2.  Dynamic role boundaries in intermediate care services.

Authors:  Susan Nancarrow
Journal:  J Interprof Care       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.338

3.  The impact of intermediate care services on job satisfaction, skills and career development opportunities.

Authors:  Susan Nancarrow
Journal:  J Clin Nurs       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.036

4.  Looking inside the black box of community rehabilitation and intermediate care teams in the United Kingdom: an audit of service and staffing.

Authors:  Susan Nancarrow; Anna Moran; Jenny Freeman; Pamela Enderby; Simon Dixon; Stuart Parker; Mike Bradburn
Journal:  Qual Prim Care       Date:  2009

5.  Diversity in intermediate care.

Authors:  Graham Paul Martin; Susan Margaret Peet; Graham John Hewitt; Hilda Parker
Journal:  Health Soc Care Community       Date:  2004-03

6.  Improving services for older people--National Service Framework for Older People.

Authors:  A le May
Journal:  J R Soc Promot Health       Date:  2001-09

7.  Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states.

Authors:  P Dolan
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Views of older people on cataract surgery options: an assessment of preferences by conjoint analysis.

Authors:  M-A Ross; A J Avery; A J E Foss
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2003-02

9.  The relationship between staff skill mix, costs and outcomes in intermediate care services.

Authors:  Simon Dixon; Billingsley Kaambwa; Susan Nancarrow; Graham P Martin; Stirling Bryan
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-07-29       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Assisting role redesign: a qualitative evaluation of the implementation of a podiatry assistant role to a community health setting utilising a traineeship approach.

Authors:  Anna M Moran; Susan A Nancarrow; Leah Wiseman; Kerryn Maher; Rosalie A Boyce; Alan M Borthwick; Karen Murphy
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 2.303

View more
  7 in total

1.  How Remote Interventions Can Reduce the Impact of Disease-Related Malnutrition for Community Patients With Long-Term Conditions.

Authors:  Carl Deaney; Karly Hoggard
Journal:  J Prim Care Community Health       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec

2.  Critically appraised paper: In people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, initiation of nocturnal non-invasive ventilation at home is non-inferior to initiation during a hospital admission [commentary].

Authors:  Anne Holland
Journal:  J Physiother       Date:  2020-08-23       Impact factor: 7.000

Review 3.  Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide.

Authors:  Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Bas Donkers; Marcel F Jonker; Elly A Stolk
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.

Authors:  Vikas Soekhai; Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Alan R Ellis; Caroline M Vass
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Taste, choice and timing: Investigating resident and carer preferences for meals in aged care homes.

Authors:  Rachel Milte; Julie Ratcliffe; Gang Chen; Michelle Miller; Maria Crotty
Journal:  Nurs Health Sci       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 1.857

6.  Variation in access to community rehabilitation services and length of stay in hospital following a hip fracture: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Jenny Neuburger; Karen A Harding; Rachel J D Bradley; David A Cromwell; Celia L Gregson
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 7.  Patient and Public Preferences for Coordinated Care in Switzerland: Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Anna Nicolet; Clémence Perraudin; Joël Wagner; Ingrid Gilles; Nicolas Krucien; Isabelle Peytremann-Bridevaux; Joachim Marti
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 3.481

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.