Literature DB >> 26421597

Preferences for end-of-life care among community-dwelling older adults and patients with advanced cancer: A discrete choice experiment.

Eric A Finkelstein1, Marcel Bilger2, Terry N Flynn3, Chetna Malhotra4.   

Abstract

Singapore is in the midst of several healthcare reforms in efforts to finance and deliver health services for a rapidly aging population. The primary focus of these reforms is to make healthcare services, including those at the end of life (EOL), affordable. Given the increasingly high health care costs at the EOL, policy makers need to consider how best to allocate resources. One strategy is to allocate resources based on the preferences of sub-populations most likely to be affected. This paper thus aims to quantify preferences for EOL care both among community dwelling older adults (CDOAs) and among patients with a life-limiting illness. A discrete choice experiment was administered to CDOAs and advanced cancer patients in Singapore and willingness to pay (WTP) for specific EOL improvements was estimated. We find that patients have a higher WTP for nearly all EOL attributes compared with CDOAs. We also show that, for both groups, moderate life extension is not the most important consideration; WTP for one additional life year is lower than common thresholds for cost-effectiveness. Irrespective of whose preference are considered, the results highlight the importance of pain management and supporting home deaths at the EOL, perhaps at the expense of public funding for costly but only marginally effective treatments.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Advanced cancer; Discrete choice experiment; End-of-life; Willingness-to-pay

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26421597     DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.09.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Policy        ISSN: 0168-8510            Impact factor:   2.980


  20 in total

1.  Did a Goals-of-Care Discussion Happen? Differences in the Occurrence of Goals-of-Care Discussions as Reported by Patients, Clinicians, and in the Electronic Health Record.

Authors:  Matthew E Modes; Ruth A Engelberg; Lois Downey; Elizabeth L Nielsen; J Randall Curtis; Erin K Kross
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 3.612

2.  Patient-Reported Receipt of Goal-Concordant Care Among Seriously Ill Outpatients-Prevalence and Associated Factors.

Authors:  Matthew E Modes; Susan R Heckbert; Ruth A Engelberg; Elizabeth L Nielsen; J Randall Curtis; Erin K Kross
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 3.612

3.  Accounting for Scale Heterogeneity in Healthcare-Related Discrete Choice Experiments when Comparing Stated Preferences: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Stuart J Wright; Caroline M Vass; Gene Sim; Michael Burton; Denzil G Fiebig; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Effect of a Patient and Clinician Communication-Priming Intervention on Patient-Reported Goals-of-Care Discussions Between Patients With Serious Illness and Clinicians: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  J Randall Curtis; Lois Downey; Anthony L Back; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Sudiptho Paul; Alexandria Z Lahdya; Patsy D Treece; Priscilla Armstrong; Ronald Peck; Ruth A Engelberg
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 21.873

5.  Preferences for Primary Healthcare Services Among Older Adults with Chronic Disease: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Yingying Peng; Mingzhu Jiang; Xiao Shen; Xianglin Li; Erping Jia; Juyang Xiong
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2020-09-17       Impact factor: 2.711

6.  Do preferences differ based on respondent experience of a health issue and its treatment? A case study using a public health intervention.

Authors:  David J Mott; Laura Ternent; Luke Vale
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2022-06-18

7.  Quality versus quantity in end-of-life choices of cancer patients and support persons: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Amy Waller; Rob Sanson-Fisher; Scott D Brown; Laura Wall; Justin Walsh
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Are Efficient Designs Used in Discrete Choice Experiments Too Difficult for Some Respondents? A Case Study Eliciting Preferences for End-of-Life Care.

Authors:  Terry N Flynn; Marcel Bilger; Chetna Malhotra; Eric A Finkelstein
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Valuing End-of-Life Care for Older People with Advanced Cancer: Is Dying at Home Important?

Authors:  Patricia Kenny; Deborah J Street; Jane Hall; Meera Agar; Jane Phillips
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 3.883

10.  Facilitating communication for critically ill patients and their family members: Study protocol for two randomized trials implemented in the U.S. and France.

Authors:  J Randall Curtis; Nancy Kentish-Barnes; Lyndia C Brumback; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Kathryn I Pollak; Patsy D Treece; Lisa Hudson; Gigi Garzio; Jennifer Im; Bryan J Weiner; Nita Khandelwal; Matthieu Resche-Rigon; Elie Azoulay; Ruth A Engelberg
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 2.261

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.