The Relative Importance of Quality of Care Information When Choosing a Hospital for Surgical Treatment

Author:

Marang-van de Mheen P. J.12345,Dijs-Elsinga J.12345,Otten W.12345,Versluijs M.12345,Smeets H. J.12345,Vree R.12345,van der Made W. J.12345,Kievit J.12345

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands (PJM, JD-E, WO, JK)

2. TNO Quality of Life, BU Prevention and Health, Section Health Promotion, Leiden, the Netherlands (WO)

3. Federation of Patients and Consumer Organisations in the Netherlands (NPCF), Utrecht, the Netherlands (MV)

4. Department of Surgery, Bronovo Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands (HJS)

5. Department of Surgery, Diaconessenhuis Leiden, the Netherlands (RV)

Abstract

Objective: To assess the impact of quality of care and other hospital information on patients’ choices between hospitals. Methods: 665 former surgical patients were invited to respond to an Internet-based questionnaire including a choice-based conjoint analysis. Each patient was presented with 12 different comparisons of 2 hospitals, with each hospital characterized by 6 attributes containing 2 levels. Hospital attributes were included if frequently reported by patients as most important for future hospital choices. These included both general hospital information (e.g., atmosphere), information on quality of care (e.g., percentage of patients with “textbook outcome”), and surgery-specific information (e.g., possibility for minimally invasive procedure). Hierarchial Bayes estimation was used to estimate the utilities for each attribute level for each patient. Based on the ranges of these utilities, the relative importance of each hospital attribute was determined for each participant as a measure of the impact on patients’ choices. Results: 308 (46.3%) questionnaires were available for analysis. Of the hospital attributes that patients considered, surgery-specific information on average had the highest relative importance (25.7 [23.9–27.5]), regardless of gender, age, and education. Waiting time and hospital atmosphere were considered least important. The attribute concerning the percentage of patients with “textbook outcomes” had the second greatest impact (18.3 [16.9–19.6]), which was similar for patients with different adverse outcome experience. Conclusions: Surgery-specific and quality of care information are more important than general information when patients choose between hospitals.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

Reference23 articles.

1. An international review of projects on hospital performance assessment

2. The Public Release of Performance Data

3. Public Reporting in Health Care: How Do Consumers Use Quality-of-Care Information?

4. Systematic Review: The Evidence That Publishing Patient Care Performance Data Improves Quality of Care

5. Netherlands Institute for Public Health and the Environment. Kiesbeter.nl: the public healthcare portal (in Dutch). Utrecht, Netherlands: Netherlands Institute for Public Health and the Environment; 2006.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3