The elicitation of patient preferences for hip replacement surgery: a discrete choice experiment.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Health Services Research Pub Date : 2025-02-18 DOI:10.1186/s12913-025-12393-6
Stefan Rohrbacher, Martin Emmert
{"title":"The elicitation of patient preferences for hip replacement surgery: a discrete choice experiment.","authors":"Stefan Rohrbacher, Martin Emmert","doi":"10.1186/s12913-025-12393-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The calculation of aggregated composite measures is a widely used approach to reduce the amount of quality-related data on hospital report cards (HRCs). This study aims to elicit patient preferences for hospital choice concerning publicly available hospital quality information for total hip replacement surgery. The results may assist in the development of weighted composite measures for elective hip replacement, which facilitates a conscious selection of the hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collect primary survey data on a sample of 364 randomly selected users of the German HRC \"Weisse Liste\" (WL) (4/5 2023). The key attributes for hospital choice are based on the information provided in WL. We run various model specifications to identify patient preferences, allowing the analysis of unobserved preference heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our sample consists of 177 respondents (mean age 56.46; 43.5% female). All attributes used are statistically significant for hospital choice ( <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo><</mo> <mn>0.01</mn></mrow> </math> ). Patients consider the \"Quality of treatment\" (26.95%; level range 1.734) and \"Number of cases treated\" (24.78%; level range 1.594) to be the most important. In contrast, \"EndoCert Certificate\" (17.50%; level range 1.126), \"Equipment and qualification\" (15.83%; level range 1.018), and \"Recommendation from other patients\" (14.94%; level range 0.960) remain less important. We find no evidence for unobserved heterogeneity regarding the preferences for hospital choice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on our findings, HRC users value publicly available hospital quality information for elective hip replacement differently. These differences should be taken into account when calculating aggregated composite measures. Our results may allow the calculation of a weighted aggregate composite measure from the perspective of HRC users.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"268"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11834257/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-12393-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The calculation of aggregated composite measures is a widely used approach to reduce the amount of quality-related data on hospital report cards (HRCs). This study aims to elicit patient preferences for hospital choice concerning publicly available hospital quality information for total hip replacement surgery. The results may assist in the development of weighted composite measures for elective hip replacement, which facilitates a conscious selection of the hospital.

Methods: We collect primary survey data on a sample of 364 randomly selected users of the German HRC "Weisse Liste" (WL) (4/5 2023). The key attributes for hospital choice are based on the information provided in WL. We run various model specifications to identify patient preferences, allowing the analysis of unobserved preference heterogeneity.

Results: Our sample consists of 177 respondents (mean age 56.46; 43.5% female). All attributes used are statistically significant for hospital choice ( p < 0.01 ). Patients consider the "Quality of treatment" (26.95%; level range 1.734) and "Number of cases treated" (24.78%; level range 1.594) to be the most important. In contrast, "EndoCert Certificate" (17.50%; level range 1.126), "Equipment and qualification" (15.83%; level range 1.018), and "Recommendation from other patients" (14.94%; level range 0.960) remain less important. We find no evidence for unobserved heterogeneity regarding the preferences for hospital choice.

Conclusion: Based on our findings, HRC users value publicly available hospital quality information for elective hip replacement differently. These differences should be taken into account when calculating aggregated composite measures. Our results may allow the calculation of a weighted aggregate composite measure from the perspective of HRC users.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
髋关节置换手术患者偏好的启发:一个离散选择实验。
背景:计算综合综合措施是一种广泛使用的方法,以减少医院报告卡(hrc)上与质量相关的数据量。本研究旨在探讨患者对全髋关节置换术医院质量信息的选择偏好。结果可能有助于制定选择性髋关节置换术的加权综合措施,这有助于有意识地选择医院。方法:我们收集了364名随机选择的德国HRC“Weisse list”(WL)用户样本的初步调查数据(4/5 2023)。医院选择的关键属性基于WL中提供的信息。我们运行各种模型规格来确定患者偏好,允许分析未观察到的偏好异质性。结果:我们的样本包括177名受访者(平均年龄56.46;43.5%的女性)。医院选择的所有属性均有统计学意义(p < 0.01)。患者认为“治疗质量”(26.95%;水平范围1.734)和“治疗病例数”(24.78%;水平范围1.594)是最重要的。相比之下,“EndoCert证书”(17.50%;水平范围1.126),“设备和资格”(15.83%;水平范围1.018),“其他患者推荐”(14.94%;水平区间0.960)仍然不太重要。我们没有发现关于医院选择偏好的未观察到的异质性的证据。结论:基于我们的研究结果,HRC使用者对选择性髋关节置换术中可公开获得的医院质量信息的评价不同。在计算综合综合措施时,应考虑到这些差异。我们的结果可能允许从HRC用户的角度计算加权聚合复合度量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
期刊最新文献
Qualitative insights into career perception of female community pharmacists in Saudi Arabia. Integrating the behavior change wheel and co-design approach in selecting strategies for improving cervical cancer screening literacy among rural women living with HIV in Eastern Uganda. Geriatricians' perceptions on multidisciplinary heart failure care in Belgium an exploratory qualitative study. "We carried her in a wheelbarrow to the clinic": process evaluation of the AMETHIST intervention combining microplanning with self-help groups to improve HIV prevention and treatment among female sex workers in Zimbabwe. Digitalizing Uganda's health supply chain system through an integrated solar-powered infrastructure at hard-to-reach health facilities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1