IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v16y2023i2d10.1007_s40271-022-00609-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient Preferences for Attributes that Characterise Alternative Models of Care in Gastroenterology: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Rumbidzai N. Mutsekwa

    (Nutrition and Food Services
    Allied Health Research Team
    Griffith University)

  • Katrina L. Campbell

    (Griffith University
    Griffith University
    Metro North Hospital and Health Service)

  • Russell Canavan

    (Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service)

  • Brendan Mulhern

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Rebecca L. Angus

    (Nutrition and Food Services
    Griffith University)

  • Joshua M. Byrnes

    (Griffith University
    Griffith University)

Abstract

Objectives Increased demand for gastroenterology services has resulted in growing waitlists, with patients at risk of exceeding clinically recommended wait-times. Given limited healthcare resources, expanded scope models of care are an option to help address this demand, but little is known about patient preferences for these models of care. Methods Low-risk gastroenterology patients (n = 1198) referred to an outpatient tertiary service in Australia over a 2-year period were invited to participate in an unlabelled discrete choice experiment with seven attributes: primary healthcare professional, wait-time, continuity of care, consultation length, manner and communication skills, reassurance, and cost. These were developed using qualitative research, literature review, and stakeholders’ experiences. A d-efficient fractional design was used to construct four blocks of 12 choice sets, with two alternatives. A 13th choice set was included as a data and quality check. Latent class and mixed logit regression were used for analysis. The resulting preference parameters for individual attributes were then used to calculate willingness to pay and willingness to wait. Results Overall, the model based on the 347 respondents suggested no strong preference for professional background. All other attributes were statistically significant predictors of preference (p

Suggested Citation

  • Rumbidzai N. Mutsekwa & Katrina L. Campbell & Russell Canavan & Brendan Mulhern & Rebecca L. Angus & Joshua M. Byrnes, 2023. "Patient Preferences for Attributes that Characterise Alternative Models of Care in Gastroenterology: A Discrete Choice Experiment," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 16(2), pages 165-177, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:16:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-022-00609-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-022-00609-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-022-00609-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-022-00609-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esther Bekker-Grob & Bas Donkers & Marcel Jonker & Elly Stolk, 2015. "Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 8(5), pages 373-384, October.
    2. Siciliani, Luigi & Hurst, Jeremy, 2005. "Tackling excessive waiting times for elective surgery: a comparative analysis of policies in 12 OECD countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 201-215, May.
    3. Lancsar, Emily & Louviere, Jordan & Flynn, Terry, 2007. "Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(8), pages 1738-1753, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liu, Yun & Kong, Qingxia & de Bekker-Grob, Esther W., 2019. "Public preferences for health care facilities in rural China: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 237(C), pages 1-1.
    2. van Cranenburgh, Sander & Bliemer, Michiel C.J., 2019. "Information theoretic-based sampling of observations," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 181-197.
    3. Woorim Kim & Kyu-Tae Han & Seungju Kim, 2021. "Do Patients Residing in Provincial Areas Transport and Spend More on Cancer Treatment in Korea?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-11, September.
    4. Ting Li & Robert J. Kauffman & Eric van Heck & Peter Vervest & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2014. "Consumer Informedness and Firm Information Strategy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 345-363, June.
    5. Pfarr, Christian & Schmid, Andreas, 2013. "The political economics of social health insurance: the tricky case of individuals’ preferences," MPRA Paper 44534, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Andrea N. Natsky & Andrew Vakulin & Ching Li Chai-Coetzer & R. Doug McEvoy & Robert J. Adams & Billingsley Kaambwa, 2022. "Preferred Attributes of Care Pathways for Obstructive Sleep Apnoea from the Perspective of Diagnosed Patients and High-Risk Individuals: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 597-607, July.
    7. Stephanie Knox & Rosalie Viney & Deborah Street & Marion Haas & Denzil Fiebig & Edith Weisberg & Deborah Bateson, 2012. "What’s Good and Bad About Contraceptive Products?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(12), pages 1187-1202, December.
    8. Askildsen, Jan Erik & Holmås, Tor Helge & Kaarboe, Oddvar, 2010. "Prioritization and patients' rights: Analysing the effect of a reform in the Norwegian hospital sector," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 199-208, January.
    9. Richard Norman & Jane Hall & Deborah Street & Rosalie Viney, 2013. "Efficiency And Equity: A Stated Preference Approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(5), pages 568-581, May.
    10. Dimitrios Gouglas & Kendall Hoyt & Elizabeth Peacocke & Aristidis Kaloudis & Trygve Ottersen & John-Arne Røttingen, 2019. "Setting Strategic Objectives for the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations: An Exploratory Decision Analysis Process," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 430-446, November.
    11. Gutacker, Nils & Siciliani, Luigi & Cookson, Richard, 2016. "Waiting time prioritisation: Evidence from England," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 140-151.
    12. Zac Coates & Michelle Kelly & Scott Brown, 2024. "The Relationship between Climate Anxiety and Pro-Environment Behaviours," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-14, June.
    13. Domenico Lisi & Giacomo Pignataro, 2021. "A note on the trade‐off between waiting times and quality in a constrained hospital market," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 180-185, January.
    14. Silviya Nikolova; & Arthur Sinko; & Matt Sutton;, 2012. "Do maximum waiting times guarantees change clinical priorities? A Conditional Density Estimation approach," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 12/07, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    15. Luyi Yang & Laurens G. Debo & Varun Gupta, 2019. "Search Among Queues Under Quality Differentiation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3605-3623, August.
    16. Siciliani, L., 2016. "Waiting Time Policies in the Health Sector," Seminar Briefing 001724, Office of Health Economics.
    17. Frimpong, Jemima A. & Helleringer, Stephane, 2020. "Financial Incentives for Downloading COVID–19 Digital Contact Tracing Apps," SocArXiv 9vp7x, Center for Open Science.
    18. Pengfei Guo & Christopher S. Tang & Yulan Wang & Ming Zhao, 2019. "The Impact of Reimbursement Policy on Social Welfare, Revisit Rate, and Waiting Time in a Public Healthcare System: Fee-for-Service Versus Bundled Payment," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 154-170, January.
    19. John Buckell & Joachim Marti & Jody L. Sindelar, 2017. "Should Flavors be Banned in E-cigarettes? Evidence on Adult Smokers and Recent Quitters from a Discrete Choice Experiment," NBER Working Papers 23865, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Shehely Parvin & Paul Wang & Jashim Uddin, 2016. "Using best-worst scaling method to examine consumers’ value preferences: A multidimensional perspective," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1199110-119, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:16:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-022-00609-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.