Using conjoint analysis to estimate patients' selection preferences for hospitals and surgeons
نام عام مواد
[Thesis]
نام نخستين پديدآور
Justin J. Coran
نام ساير پديدآوران
Koropeckyj-Cox, Tanya
وضعیت نشر و پخش و غیره
نام ناشر، پخش کننده و غيره
University of Florida
تاریخ نشرو بخش و غیره
2015
مشخصات ظاهری
نام خاص و کميت اثر
264
یادداشتهای مربوط به نشر، بخش و غیره
متن يادداشت
Place of publication: United States, Ann Arbor; ISBN=978-1-369-59788-2
یادداشتهای مربوط به پایان نامه ها
جزئيات پايان نامه و نوع درجه آن
Ph.D.
نظم درجات
Sociology
کسي که مدرک را اعطا کرده
University of Florida
امتياز متن
2015
یادداشتهای مربوط به خلاصه یا چکیده
متن يادداشت
Prior to a clinical encounter, patients face a complex decision process to select an appropriate doctor or hospital for their medical care. Health disparities may result from sub-optimal decision-making if patients do not have enough support to understand all of their options for care. In addition, too many available hospital or provider options could result in decisional conflict, further exacerbating new disparities in care. The purpose of this study was to gain new insight on how people tradeoff among desirable and undesirable health care attributes when selecting hospitals or surgeons for an elective medical procedure. A stratified cross-sectional convenience sample of subjects (N=2,035) were invited from an Internet survey panel to complete one of two choicebased conjoint surveys. Participants selected either a hospital or orthopedic surgeon based on nine attributes. Conjoint attributes and corresponding levels were developed from a new conceptual framework illustrating health care preferences (i.e., The PMO Health Care Influence Mix). Hierarchical Bayes estimation was used to fit conjoint utilities to individual participants and capture heterogeneity between segments of respondents. The relative importances (RI) of different attributes were examined using Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Market simulation methods provided insight on the implications of part-worth utility values. Participants placed the most importance weight on out-of-pocket cost for both decision tasks (RI of 24.5% for hospitals, P < 0.001; RI of 21.1% for surgeons, P < 0.003). The second and third most important factors were previous health care experience (RI of 13.9% for hospitals, P < 0.001; RI of 18.4% for surgeons, P < 0.024) and a recommendation from an established primary care provider (RI of 15.8% for hospitals, P < 0.001; RI of 14.4% for surgeons, P < 0.002). Market simulations suggest cost does not dominate decision-making since respondents were willing to select more expensive hospitals and providers in order to access greater shared decision-making and collaboration. Participants reported higher decisional conflict if they needed to select a surgeon. Highly conflicted individuals may increase the importance of out-of-pocket cost. People with lower decisional conflict were observed with higher RI scores for communication-related attributes.
موضوع (اسم عام یاعبارت اسمی عام)
موضوع مستند نشده
Medicine; Public health; Sociology
اصطلاحهای موضوعی کنترل نشده
اصطلاح موضوعی
Social sciences;Health and environmental sciences;Conjoint analysis;Hospitals;Medical decision making;Patients;Surgeons
نام شخص به منزله سر شناسه - (مسئولیت معنوی درجه اول )