scholarly journals Patient Preferences for Treatment of Low Back Pain—A Discrete Choice Experiment

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 390-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirja Elisabeth Kløjgaard ◽  
Claus Manniche ◽  
Line Bjørnskov Pedersen ◽  
Mickael Bech ◽  
Rikke Søgaard
2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 249-255
Author(s):  
Giovanni E Ferreira ◽  
Kirsten Howard ◽  
Joshua R Zadro ◽  
Mary O'Keeffe ◽  
Chung-Wei Christine Lin ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. e0187709 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Aboagye ◽  
Jan Hagberg ◽  
Iben Axén ◽  
Lydia Kwak ◽  
Malin Lohela-Karlsson ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. e0126912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li-Chia Chen ◽  
Li-Jen Cheng ◽  
Yan Zhang ◽  
Xin He ◽  
Roger D. Knaggs

2021 ◽  
pp. 1357633X2110228
Author(s):  
Centaine L Snoswell ◽  
Anthony C Smith ◽  
Matthew Page ◽  
Liam J Caffery

Introduction Telehealth has been shown to improve access to care, reduce personal expenses and reduce the need for travel. Despite these benefits, patients may be less inclined to seek a telehealth service, if they consider it inferior to an in-person encounter. The aims of this study were to identify patient preferences for attributes of a healthcare service and to quantify the value of these attributes. Methods We surveyed patients who had taken an outpatient telehealth consult in the previous year using a survey that included a discrete choice experiment. We investigated patient preferences for attributes of healthcare delivery and their willingness to pay for out-of-pocket costs. Results Patients ( n = 62) preferred to have a consultation, regardless of type, than no consultation at all. Patients preferred healthcare services with lower out-of-pocket costs, higher levels of perceived benefit and less time away from usual activities ( p < 0.008). Most patients preferred specialist care over in-person general practitioner care. Their order of preference to obtain specialist care was a videoconsultation into the patient’s local general practitioner practice or hospital ( p < 0.003), a videoconsultation into the home, and finally travelling for in-person appointment. Patients were willing to pay out-of-pocket costs for attributes they valued: to be seen by a specialist over videoconference ($129) and to reduce time away from usual activities ($160). Conclusion Patients value specialist care, lower out-of-pocket costs and less time away from usual activities. Telehealth is more likely than in-person care to cater to these preferences in many instances.


2021 ◽  
pp. 135581962110354
Author(s):  
Anthony W Gilbert ◽  
Emmanouil Mentzakis ◽  
Carl R May ◽  
Maria Stokes ◽  
Jeremy Jones

Objective Virtual Consultations may reduce the need for face-to-face outpatient appointments, thereby potentially reducing the cost and time involved in delivering health care. This study reports a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that identifies factors that influence patient preferences for virtual consultations in an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting. Methods Previous research from the CONNECT (Care in Orthopaedics, burdeN of treatmeNt and the Effect of Communication Technology) Project and best practice guidance informed the development of our DCE. An efficient fractional factorial design with 16 choice scenarios was created that identified all main effects and partial two-way interactions. The design was divided into two blocks of eight scenarios each, to reduce the impact of cognitive fatigue. Data analysis were conducted using binary logit regression models. Results Sixty-one paired response sets (122 subjects) were available for analysis. DCE factors (whether the therapist is known to the patient, duration of appointment, time of day) and demographic factors (patient qualifications, access to equipment, difficulty with activities, multiple health issues, travel costs) were significant predictors of preference. We estimate that a patient is less than 1% likely to prefer a virtual consultation if the patient has a degree, is without access to the equipment and software to undertake a virtual consultation, does not have difficulties with day-to-day activities, is undergoing rehabilitation for one problem area, has to pay less than £5 to travel, is having a consultation with a therapist not known to them, in 1 weeks’ time, lasting 60 minutes, at 2 pm. We have developed a simple conceptual model to explain how these factors interact to inform preference, including patients’ access to resources, context for the consultation and the requirements of the consultation. Conclusions This conceptual model provides the framework to focus attention towards factors that might influence patient preference for virtual consultations. Our model can inform the development of future technologies, trials, and qualitative work to further explore the mechanisms that influence preference.


2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 643-653
Author(s):  
Sarah Janse ◽  
Ellen Janssen ◽  
Tanya Huwig ◽  
Upal Basu Roy ◽  
Andrea Ferris ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document