Literature DB >> 26689700

A Comparison of Methods for Capturing Patient Preferences for Delivery of Mental Health Services to Low-Income Hispanics Engaged in Primary Care.

Patricia M Herman1, Maia Ingram2, Charles E Cunningham3, Heather Rimas4, Lucy Murrieta5, Kenneth Schachter2, Jill Guernsey de Zapien2, Scott C Carvajal6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Consideration of patient preferences regarding delivery of mental health services within primary care may greatly improve access and quality of care for the many who could benefit from those services.
OBJECTIVES: This project evaluated the feasibility and usefulness of adding a consumer-products design method to qualitative methods implemented within a community-based participatory research (CBPR) framework. RESEARCH
DESIGN: Discrete-choice conjoint experiment (DCE) added to systematic focus group data collection and analysis.
SUBJECTS: Focus group data were collected from 64 patients of a Federally-Qualified Health Center (FQHC) serving a predominantly low-income Hispanic population. A total of 604 patients in the waiting rooms of the FQHC responded to the DCE. MEASURES: The DCE contained 15 choice tasks that each asked respondents to choose between three mental health services options described by the levels of two (of eight) attributes based on themes that emerged from focus group data.
RESULTS: The addition of the DCE was found to be feasible and useful in providing distinct information on relative patient preferences compared with the focus group analyses alone. According to market simulations, the package of mental health services guided by the results of the DCE was preferred by patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Unique patterns of patient preferences were uncovered by the DCE and these findings were useful in identifying pragmatic solutions to better address the mental health service needs of this population. However, for this resource-intensive method to be adopted more broadly, the scale of the primary care setting and/or scope of the issue addressed have to be relatively large.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26689700     DOI: 10.1007/s40271-015-0155-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient        ISSN: 1178-1653            Impact factor:   3.883


  31 in total

1.  Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care.

Authors:  M Ryan; S Farrar
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-03

2.  Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health - How are Studies being Designed and Reported?: An Update on Current Practice in the Published Literature between 2005 and 2008.

Authors:  Deborah Marshall; John F P Bridges; Brett Hauber; Ruthanne Cameron; Lauren Donnalley; Ken Fyie; F Reed Johnson
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Encouraging patients with depressive symptoms to seek care: a mixed methods approach to message development.

Authors:  Robert A Bell; Debora A Paterniti; Rahman Azari; Paul R Duberstein; Ronald M Epstein; Aaron B Rochlen; Megan Dwight Johnson; Sharon E Orrange; Christina Slee; Richard L Kravitz
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2009-08-11

4.  Psychiatry and primary care integration: challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Eliot Sorel; Anita Everett
Journal:  Int Rev Psychiatry       Date:  2011

5.  What are the key attributes of primary care for patients? Building a conceptual 'map' of patient preferences.

Authors:  Sudeh Cheraghi-Sohi; Peter Bower; Nichola Mead; Ruth McDonald; Diane Whalley; Martin Roland
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Patient weighting of importance of asthma symptoms.

Authors:  L M Osman; L McKenzie; J Cairns; J A Friend; D J Godden; J S Legge; J G Douglas
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 9.139

7.  Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques.

Authors:  M Ryan; D A Scott; C Reeves; A Bate; E R van Teijlingen; E M Russell; M Napper; C M Robb
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.014

8.  Depression treatment preferences among Japanese undergraduates: using conjoint analysis.

Authors:  Yasuyuki Okumura; Shinji Sakamoto
Journal:  Int J Soc Psychiatry       Date:  2011-02-21

9.  Towards personalizing treatment for depression : developing treatment values markers.

Authors:  Marsha N Wittink; Knashawn H Morales; Mark Cary; Joseph J Gallo; Stephen J Bartels
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.883

10.  Patient Preferences of a Low-Income Hispanic Population for Mental Health Services in Primary Care.

Authors:  Patricia M Herman; Maia Ingram; Heather Rimas; Scott Carvajal; Charles E Cunningham
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2016-09
View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  What Matters for Evaluating the Quality of Mental Healthcare? Identifying Important Aspects in Qualitative Focus Groups with Service Users and Frontline Mental Health Professionals.

Authors:  Philip A Powell; Donna Rowen
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 3.481

2.  The Public's Preferences for Psychological Interventions During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Hui-Qin Li; Shu-Xiang Liu; Hui Xue; Hua Yuan; Xiu-Ying Zhang
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 5.435

3.  Using discrete choice experiments to develop and deliver patient-centered psychological interventions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Meghan E McGrady; Ahna L H Pai; Lisa A Prosser
Journal:  Health Psychol Rev       Date:  2020-01-22

Review 4.  Application of discrete choice experiments to enhance stakeholder engagement as a strategy for advancing implementation: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ramzi G Salloum; Elizabeth A Shenkman; Jordan J Louviere; David A Chambers
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 7.327

5.  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

Review 6.  Mental health service preferences of patients and providers: a scoping review of conjoint analysis and discrete choice experiments from global public health literature over the last 20 years (1999-2019).

Authors:  Anna Larsen; Albert Tele; Manasi Kumar
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 2.655

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.