Kei Long Cheung1, Silvia M A A Evers2, Mickaël Hiligsmann3, Zoltán Vokó4, Subhash Pokhrel5, Teresa Jones5, Celia Muñoz6, Silke B Wolfenstetter7, Judit Józwiak-Hagymásy8, Hein de Vries9. 1. Caphri school of Public Health and Primary Care, Health Services Research, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, GT Maastricht, 6229, The Netherlands. Electronic address: kl.cheung@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 2. Caphri school of Public Health and Primary Care, Health Services Research, Maastricht University, Trimbos Institute, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Duboisdomein 30, GT Maastricht, 6229, The Netherlands. 3. Caphri school of Public Health and Primary Care, Health Services Research, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, GT Maastricht, 6229, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Health Policy & Health Economics, Faculty of Social Sciences, Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány Péter sétány 1/a, Budapest, 1117, Hungary; Syreon Research Institute, Thököly út 119, Budapest, 1146, Hungary. 5. Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University London, UB8 3PH, Uxbridge, United Kingdom. 6. Centre for Research in Health and Economics (CRES), University Pompeu Fabra, Ramon Trias Fargas 25-27, Barcelona, 08005, Spain. 7. Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management Helmholtz Zentrum München-German Research Center for Environmental Health (GmbH), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Ingolstädter Landstr. 1, Neuherberg, 85764, Germany. 8. Syreon Research Institute, Thököly út 119, Budapest, 1146, Hungary. 9. Caphri school of Public Health and Primary Care Health Promotion, Maastricht University, POB 616 6200, MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite an increased number of economic evaluations of tobacco control interventions, the uptake by stakeholders continues to be limited. Understanding the underlying mechanism in adopting such economic decision-support tools by stakeholders is therefore important. By applying the I-Change Model, this study aims to identify which factors determine potential uptake of an economic decision-support tool, i.e., the Return on Investment tool. METHODS: Stakeholders (decision-makers, purchasers of services/pharma products, professionals/service providers, evidence generators and advocates of health promotion) were interviewed in five countries, using an I-Change based questionnaire. MANOVA's were conducted to assess differences between intenders and non-intenders regarding beliefs. A multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify the main explanatory variables of intention to use an economic decision-support tool. FINDINGS: Ninety-three stakeholders participated. Significant differences in beliefs were found between non-intenders and intenders: risk perception, attitude, social support, and self-efficacy towards using the tool. Regression showed that demographics, pre-motivational, and motivational factors explained 69% of the variation in intention. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to provide a theoretical framework to understand differences in beliefs between stakeholders who do or do not intend to use economic decision-support tools, and empirically corroborating the framework. This contributes to our understanding of the facilitators and barriers to the uptake of these studies.
BACKGROUND: Despite an increased number of economic evaluations of tobacco control interventions, the uptake by stakeholders continues to be limited. Understanding the underlying mechanism in adopting such economic decision-support tools by stakeholders is therefore important. By applying the I-Change Model, this study aims to identify which factors determine potential uptake of an economic decision-support tool, i.e., the Return on Investment tool. METHODS: Stakeholders (decision-makers, purchasers of services/pharma products, professionals/service providers, evidence generators and advocates of health promotion) were interviewed in five countries, using an I-Change based questionnaire. MANOVA's were conducted to assess differences between intenders and non-intenders regarding beliefs. A multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify the main explanatory variables of intention to use an economic decision-support tool. FINDINGS: Ninety-three stakeholders participated. Significant differences in beliefs were found between non-intenders and intenders: risk perception, attitude, social support, and self-efficacy towards using the tool. Regression showed that demographics, pre-motivational, and motivational factors explained 69% of the variation in intention. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to provide a theoretical framework to understand differences in beliefs between stakeholders who do or do not intend to use economic decision-support tools, and empirically corroborating the framework. This contributes to our understanding of the facilitators and barriers to the uptake of these studies.
Authors: Zoltan Vokó; Kei Long Cheung; Judit Józwiak-Hagymásy; Silke Wolfenstetter; Teresa Jones; Celia Muñoz; Silvia M A A Evers; Mickaël Hiligsmann; Hein de Vries; Subhash Pokhrel Journal: Health Res Policy Syst Date: 2016-05-26
Authors: Puttarin Kulchaitanaroaj; Zoltán Kaló; Robert West; Kei Long Cheung; Silvia Evers; Zoltán Vokó; Mickael Hiligsmann; Hein de Vries; Lesley Owen; Marta Trapero-Bertran; Reiner Leidl; Subhash Pokhrel Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 2.655