Literature DB >> 26255998

Patient Preferences for Features of Health Care Delivery Systems: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Axel C Mühlbacher1,2,3, Susanne Bethge2, Shelby D Reed3, Kevin A Schulman3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the relative importance of organizational-, procedural-, and interpersonal-level features of health care delivery systems from the patient perspective. DATA SOURCES/STUDY
SETTING: We designed four discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to measure patient preferences for 21 health system attributes. Participants were recruited through the online patient portal of a large health system. We analyzed the DCE data using random effects logit models. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
METHODS: DCEs were performed in which respondents were provided with descriptions of alternative scenarios and asked to indicate which scenario they prefer. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of the three possible health scenarios (current health, new lung cancer diagnosis, or diabetes) and asked to complete 15 choice tasks. Each choice task included an annual out-of-pocket cost attribute. PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: A total of 3,900 respondents completed the survey. The out-of-pocket cost attribute was considered the most important across the four different DCEs. Following the cost attribute, trust and respect, multidisciplinary care, and shared decision making were judged as most important. The relative importance of out-of-pocket cost was consistently lower in the hypothetical context of a new lung cancer diagnosis compared with diabetes or the patient's current health.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the complexity of patient decision making processes regarding features of health care delivery systems. Our findings suggest the importance of these features may change as a function of an individual's medical conditions. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Patient preference; choice behavior; delivery of health care; discrete choice models

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26255998      PMCID: PMC4799904          DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.12345

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.402


  21 in total

1.  Outcome-related health targets--political strategies for better health outcomes: a conceptual and comparative study (part 2).

Authors:  Matthias Wismar; Reinhard Busse
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 2.  Methods for incorporating patients' views in health care.

Authors:  Michel Wensing; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-04-19

3.  How health insurance design affects access to care and costs, by income, in eleven countries.

Authors:  Cathy Schoen; Robin Osborn; David Squires; Michelle M Doty; Roz Pierson; Sandra Applebaum
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 6.301

4.  Effects coding in discrete choice experiments.

Authors:  Mickael Bech; Dorte Gyrd-Hansen
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.046

5.  Conjoint analysis applications in health--a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; A Brett Hauber; Deborah Marshall; Andrew Lloyd; Lisa A Prosser; Dean A Regier; F Reed Johnson; Josephine Mauskopf
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2011-04-22       Impact factor: 5.725

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.  Evidence-based disease management.

Authors:  G Ellrodt; D J Cook; J Lee; M Cho; D Hunt; S Weingarten
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-11-26       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution.

Authors:  C Laine; F Davidoff
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1996-01-10       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 9.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Mandy Ryan; Karen Gerard
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2010-12-19       Impact factor: 3.046

10.  Framework for primary care organizations: the importance of a structural domain.

Authors:  William Hogg; Margo Rowan; Grant Russell; Robert Geneau; Laura Muldoon
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2007-11-30       Impact factor: 2.038

View more
  9 in total

1.  Designing a Text Messaging Intervention to Improve Physical Activity Behavior Among Low-Income Latino Patients With Diabetes: A Discrete-Choice Experiment, Los Angeles, 2014-2015.

Authors:  Magaly Ramirez; Shinyi Wu; Elizabeth Beale
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2016-12-22       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 2.  Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics.

Authors:  Liz Morrell; Sarah Wordsworth; Sian Rees; Richard Barker
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Hospital choice in Germany from the patient's perspective: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Werner de Cruppé; Max Geraedts
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  Understanding consumer and clinician preferences and decision making for rehabilitation following arthroplasty in the private sector.

Authors:  Mark A Buhagiar; Justine M Naylor; Grahame Simpson; Ian A Harris; Friedbert Kohler
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 2.655

5.  Analysing the preferences for family doctor contract services in rural China: a study using a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Peipei Fu; Yi Wang; Shimeng Liu; Jiajia Li; Qiufeng Gao; Chengchao Zhou; Qingyue Meng; Sean Sylvia
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2020-07-25       Impact factor: 2.497

6.  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

7.  How Do Type 2 Diabetes Patients Value Urban Integrated Primary Care in China? Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Xin Wang; Kuimeng Song; Paiyi Zhu; Pim Valentijn; Yixiang Huang; Stephen Birch
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  Treatment Preferences of Residents Assumed to Have Severe Chronic Diseases in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Yinghao Lv; Qiang Fu; Xiao Shen; Erping Jia; Xianglin Li; Yingying Peng; Jinghong Yan; Mingzhu Jiang; Juyang Xiong
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-11-13       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 9.  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

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.