Abstract
Abstract
Aim
Long-term care considerations for persons with dementia are complex. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods are increasingly used to support healthcare decisions. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and analyze published MCDAs in which preferences for living and care concepts for persons with dementia are determined.
Subject and methods
A literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar in October 2021. Searches were limited to peer-reviewed articles published up to October 14, 2021. The included publications aimed at eliciting care preferences for persons with dementia from patients, relatives, healthcare practitioners or the broader public by means of MCDA.
Results
Ten studies were included of whom seven were published in 2017 or afterwards. In nine studies, a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted. The majority of studies surveyed the general population or caregivers of persons with dementia. Five studies assessed preferences for attributes of home care and two for long-term care facilities. Willingness to pay was addressed in eight studies. Choice task structure and experimental design varied widely. Despite different objectives, strong preferences for continuous care by the same person, organizational aspects, and caregiver expertise were found across studies.
Conclusion
This review shows that MCDA methods have successfully been applied to analyze preferences for living and care arrangements for persons with dementia. The majority of publications report on DCEs, and a variety of different study objectives and methodological approaches have been observed. Further research is needed to inform the design of innovative concepts which are a valuable alternative to existing care options.
Funder
Universität Duisburg-Essen
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference72 articles.
1. Amaya-Amaya M, Gerard K, Ryan M (2008) Discrete choice experiments in a nutshell. In: Ryan, M., Gerard, K., Amaya-Amaya, M. (eds.) Using discrete choice experiments to value health and health care. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 13–46
2. Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA
3. Bramer WM, Bain P (2017) Updating search strategies for systematic reviews using EndNote. J Med Libr Assoc 105(3):285–289. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2017.183
4. Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Kleijnen J, Franco OH (2017) Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Syst Rev 6(1):245. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y
5. Bridges JFP, Brett Hauber A, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser LA, Regier DA, Johnson FR, Mauskopf J (2011) Conjoint analysis applications in health—a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health 14(4):403–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献