scholarly journals What matters when managing childhood fever in the emergency department? A discrete-choice experiment comparing the preferences of parents and healthcare professionals in the UK

2020 ◽  
Vol 105 (8) ◽  
pp. 765-771
Author(s):  
Simon Leigh ◽  
Jude Robinson ◽  
Shunmay Yeung ◽  
Frans Coenen ◽  
Enitan D Carrol ◽  
...  

BackgroundFever among children is a leading cause of emergency department (ED) attendance and a diagnostic conundrum; yet robust quantitative evidence regarding the preferences of parents and healthcare providers (HCPs) for managing fever is scarce.ObjectiveTo determine parental and HCP preferences for the management of paediatric febrile illness in the ED.SettingTen children’s centres and a children’s ED in England from June 2018 to January 2019.Participants98 parents of children aged 0–11 years, and 99 HCPs took part.MethodsNine focus-groups and coin-ranking exercises were conducted with parents, and a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was conducted with both parents and HCPs, which asked respondents to choose their preferred option of several hypothetical management scenarios for paediatric febrile illness, with differing levels of visit time, out-of-pocket costs, antibiotic prescribing, HCP grade and pain/discomfort from investigations.ResultsThe mean focus-group size was 4.4 participants (range 3–7), with a mean duration of 27.4 min (range 18–46 min). Response rates to the DCE among parents and HCPs were 94.2% and 98.2%, respectively. Avoiding pain from diagnostics, receiving a faster diagnosis and minimising wait times were major concerns for both parents and HCPs, with parents willing-to-pay £16.89 for every 1 hour reduction in waiting times. Both groups preferred treatment by consultants and nurse practitioners to treatment by doctors in postgraduate training. Parents were willing to trade-off considerable increases in waiting times (24.1 min) to be seen by consultants and to avoid additional pain from diagnostics (45.6 min). Reducing antibiotic prescribing was important to HCPs but not parents.ConclusionsBoth parents and HCPs care strongly about reducing visit time, avoiding pain from invasive investigations and receiving diagnostic insights faster when managing paediatric febrile illness. As such, overdue advances in diagnostic capabilities should improve child and carer experience and HCP satisfaction considerably in managing paediatric febrile illness.

Author(s):  
Plaxcedes Chiwire ◽  
Charlotte Beaudart ◽  
Silvia M. Evers ◽  
Hassan Mahomed ◽  
Mickaël Hiligsmann

Understanding patients’ preferences for health facilities could help decision makers in designing patient-centered services. Therefore, this study aims to understand how patients’ willingness to trade for certain attributes affects the choice of public health facilities in the Western Cape province of Cape Town, South Africa. A discrete choice experiment was conducted in two community day centers (CDCs). Patients repetitively chose between two hypothetical health facilities that differed in six attributes: distance to facility, treatment by doctors vs. nurses, confidentiality during treatment, availability of medication, first visit (drop-in) waiting times, and appointment waiting times. The sample consisted of 463 participants. The findings showed that availability of medication (50.5%), appointment waiting times (19.5%), and first visit waiting times (10.2%) were the most important factors for patients when choosing a health facility. In addition, respondents preferred shorter appointment and first visit waiting times (<2 h). These results identified important characteristics in choosing public health facilities in Cape Town. These public health facilities could be improved by including patient voices to inform operational and policy decisions in a low-income setting.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 238146832110275
Author(s):  
Yuliu Su ◽  
Shrutivandana Sharma ◽  
Semra Ozdemir ◽  
Wai Leng Chow ◽  
Hong-Choon Oh ◽  
...  

Objective. This study investigates potential of a new financial incentive policy, the GP-referral discount scheme introduced in Singapore, in reducing nonurgent emergency department (ED) visits, and compares it with alternative interventions. Methods. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was designed to elicit patients’ preferences for ED and general practitioner (GP) under hypothetical nonurgent medical conditions. Through latent class multinomial logistic regression, choice models were estimated to quantify how patients’ choices are influenced by GP-referral discount, other ED/GP attributes (waiting time, test facilities, and payment), patient demographics, and their perception of severity. The choice models were used to predict uptake of the GP-referral discount scheme and other countermeasures suggested by these models. Results. Survey responses from 849 respondents recruited from a public hospital in Singapore were included in the study. The choice model identified two prominent classes of patients, one of which was highly sensitive to GP-referral discount and the other to test-facility-availability. Patients’ perceptions of severity (“critical” v. “not critical” enough to go to ED directly) were highly significant in influencing preference heterogeneity. Predictive analysis based on the choice model showed that GP-referral discount is more effective when patients visit ED expecting “shorter” waits, as opposed to test-facility provision at GPs and perception-correction measures that showed stronger effects under “longer” expected waits. Conclusions. The new GP-referral financial incentive introduced in Singapore can be effective in reducing nonurgent ED visits, if it reasonably covers the (extra) cost of visiting a GP. It may serve as a complement to test-facility provision at GPs or perception-correction measures, as the financial incentive and the latter two measures appear to influence distinct classes (discount-sensitive and facility-sensitive) of patients.


2019 ◽  
Vol 111 (7) ◽  
pp. 1243-1260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Roach ◽  
Bruce K. Christensen ◽  
Elizabeth Rieger

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Peters ◽  
E van Grinsven ◽  
M van de Haterd ◽  
D van Lankveld ◽  
J Verbakel ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel C. Mühlbacher ◽  
John F. P. Bridges ◽  
Susanne Bethge ◽  
Ch.-Markos Dintsios ◽  
Anja Schwalm ◽  
...  

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.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e038865
Author(s):  
Jackline Oluoch-Aridi ◽  
Mary B Adam ◽  
Francis Wafula ◽  
Gilbert Kokwaro

ObjectiveTo identify what women want in a delivery health facility and how they rank the attributes that influence the choice of a place of delivery.DesignA discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted to elicit rural women’s preferences for choice of delivery health facility. Data were analysed using a conditional logit model to evaluate the relative importance of the selected attributes. A mixed multinomial model evaluated how interactions with sociodemographic variables influence the choice of the selected attributes.SettingSix health facilities in a rural subcounty.ParticipantsWomen aged 18–49 years who had delivered within 6 weeks.Primary outcomeThe DCE required women to select from hypothetical health facility A or B or opt-out alternative.ResultsA total of 474 participants were sampled, 466 participants completed the survey (response rate 98%). The attribute with the strongest association with health facility preference was having a kind and supportive healthcare worker (β=1.184, p<0.001), second availability of medical equipment and drug supplies (β=1.073, p<0.001) and third quality of clinical services (β=0.826, p<0.001). Distance, availability of referral services and costs were ranked fourth, fifth and sixth, respectively (β=0.457, p<0.001; β=0.266, p<0.001; and β=0.000018, p<0.001). The opt-out alternative ranked last suggesting a disutility for home delivery (β=−0.849, p<0.001).ConclusionThe most highly valued attribute was a process indicator of quality of care followed by technical indicators. Policymakers need to consider women’s preferences to inform strategies that are person centred and lead to improvements in quality of care during delivery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document