Literature DB >> 34080551

Beliefs related to health care incentives: Comparison of substance use disorder treatment providers, medical treatment providers, and a public sample.

Kimberly C Kirby1, Matthew J Dwyer2, Connor Burrows2, Dustin A Fife2, Elena Bresani3, Mary Tabit4, Bethany R Raiff2.   

Abstract

This study surveyed substance use disorder (SUD) treatment providers, medical treatment providers, and a public sample about beliefs regarding health care incentives to explore differences among the groups and across health disorders for which research has demonstrated incentives improve outcomes. Six hundred participants (n = 200/group) completed the Provider Survey of Incentives. The study found between group differences for positive and negative beliefs. The public sample was highest on the positive beliefs subscale (M = 3.81), followed by SUD (M = 3.63) and medical treatment providers (M = 3.48; F(2, 597) = 20.09, p < .001). The medical treatment providers were highest on the negative beliefs subscale (M = 2.91), compared to the public sample (M = 2.77) and SUD treatment providers (M = 2.65; F(2, 597) = 7.521, p < .001). Endorsement of incentives to treat medical disorders was similar across the groups, with obesity the most endorsed disorder. In contrast, endorsement of incentives to treat SUDs differed across groups, except for smoking. The SUD treatment providers were almost twice as likely as the public sample (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.27-2.59) and the public sample almost twice as likely as the medical treatment providers (OR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.24-2.47) to endorse the use of incentives to treat more SUDs. Medical treatment providers were also the least likely to endorse incentives to treat both legal and illicit substance use. These findings suggest that incentive programs have good acceptability among SUD treatment providers and the public, but medical treatment providers are less accepting of incentive programs. This study provides evidence that incentive-based interventions are acceptable to the public and is the first to document specific objections that individuals disseminating incentive interventions will most likely face when introducing them in medical settings.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contingency management; Financial incentives; Health care incentives; Incentives; Social validity

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34080551      PMCID: PMC8380654          DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108383

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat        ISSN: 0740-5472


  32 in total

1.  Impact of financial incentives on documented immunization rates in the inner city: results of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  G Fairbrother; M J Siegel; S Friedman; P D Kory; G C Butts
Journal:  Ambul Pediatr       Date:  2001 Jul-Aug

2.  Diffusion of preventive innovations.

Authors:  Everett M Rogers
Journal:  Addict Behav       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.913

Review 3.  Promoting healthy behaviours and improving health outcomes in low and middle income countries: a review of the impact of conditional cash transfer programmes.

Authors:  Meghna Ranganathan; Mylene Lagarde
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 4.  A meta-analysis of voucher-based reinforcement therapy for substance use disorders.

Authors:  Jennifer Plebani Lussier; Sarah H Heil; Joan A Mongeon; Gary J Badger; Stephen T Higgins
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 6.526

5.  Australian clinician attitudes towards contingency management: comparing down under with America.

Authors:  Alison Ritter; Jacqui Cameron
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2006-09-12       Impact factor: 4.492

6.  Incentives improve outcome in outpatient behavioral treatment of cocaine dependence.

Authors:  S T Higgins; A J Budney; W K Bickel; F E Foerg; R Donham; G J Badger
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1994-07

7.  Interest and preferences for contingency management design among addiction treatment clientele.

Authors:  Bryan Hartzler; Sharon Garrett
Journal:  Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse       Date:  2015-12-08       Impact factor: 3.829

8.  Acceptability of an Internet-based contingency management intervention for smoking cessation: views of smokers, nonsmokers, and healthcare professionals.

Authors:  Bethany R Raiff; Brantley P Jarvis; Marissa Turturici; Jesse Dallery
Journal:  Exp Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.157

Review 9.  Acceptability of financial incentives for encouraging uptake of healthy behaviours: A critical review using systematic methods.

Authors:  Emma L Giles; Shannon Robalino; Falko F Sniehotta; Jean Adams; Elaine McColl
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 4.018

10.  "Pay them if it works": discrete choice experiments on the acceptability of financial incentives to change health related behaviour.

Authors:  Marianne Promberger; Paul Dolan; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 4.634

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.