Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:48:26.524Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Novel application of discrete choice experiment methodology to understand how clinicians around the world triage palliative care needs: A research protocol

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2019

Bethany Russell Open the ORCID record for Bethany Russell [Opens in a new window] ,
Sara Vogrin ,
Jennifer Philip Open the ORCID record for Jennifer Philip [Opens in a new window] ,
Nicole Hennessy-Anderson ,
Anna Collins ,
Jodie Burchell ,
Brian Le ,
Caroline Brand ,
Peter Hudson  and
Vijaya Sundararajan
Bethany Russell*
Affiliation:
Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Palliative Medicine Research Group, Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Centre for Palliative Care, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Department of Palliative Care, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Sara Vogrin
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne and University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Jennifer Philip
Affiliation:
Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Palliative Medicine Research Group, Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Department of Palliative Care, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Victoria, Australia
Nicole Hennessy-Anderson
Affiliation:
Centre for Palliative Care, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Anna Collins
Affiliation:
Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Palliative Medicine Research Group, Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Jodie Burchell
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne and University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Brian Le
Affiliation:
Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Victoria, Australia Department of Palliative Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Victoria, Australia
Caroline Brand
Affiliation:
Melbourne Epicentre, University of Melbourne and Melbourne Health, Victoria, Australia Department of Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia
Peter Hudson
Affiliation:
Centre for Palliative Care, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Vrije University, Brussels, Belgium School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Vijaya Sundararajan
Affiliation:
Centre for Palliative Care, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Department of Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne and University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
*
Author for correspondence: Bethany Russell, F.R.A.C.P., F.A.Ch.P.M., M.B.B.S., St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, PO Box 2900, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia3065. E-mail [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

As referrals to specialist palliative care (PC) grow in volume and diversity, an evidence-based triage method is needed to enable services to manage waiting lists in a transparent, efficient, and equitable manner. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) have not to date been used among PC clinicians, but may serve as a rigorous and efficient method to explore and inform the complex decision-making involved in PC triage. This article presents the protocol for a novel application of an international DCE as part of a mixed-method research program, ultimately aiming to develop a clinical decision-making tool for PC triage.

Method

Five stages of protocol development were undertaken: (1) identification of attributes of interest; (2) creation and (3) execution of a pilot DCE; and (4) refinement and (5) planned execution of the final DCE.

Result

Six attributes of interest to PC triage were identified and included in a DCE that was piloted with 10 palliative care practitioners. The pilot was found to be feasible, with an acceptable cognitive burden, but refinements were made, including the creation of an additional attribute to allow independent analysis of concepts involved. Strategies for recruitment, data collection, analysis, and modeling were confirmed for the final planned DCE.

Significance of results

This DCE protocol serves as an example of how the sophisticated DCE methodology can be applied to health services research in PC. Discussion of key elements that improved the utility, integrity, and feasibility of the DCE provide valuable insights.

Keywords

Palliative careHospicesTriageResource allocationChoice behaviorPatient-centered care
Type
Original Article
Information
Palliative & Supportive Care , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , February 2019 , pp. 66 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Addington-Hall, J, Altmann, D, McCarthy, M (1998) Which terminally ill cancer patients receive hospice in-patient care? Social Science & Medicine 46(8):1011–1016.Google Scholar
Addington-Hall, J and Altmann, D (2000) Which terminally ill cancer patients in the United Kingdom receive care from community specialist palliative care nurses? Journal of Advanced Nursing 32(4):799–806.Google Scholar
Agar, M, Currow, DC, Shelby-James, TM, et al. (2008) Preference for place of care and place of death in palliative care: Are these different questions? Palliative Medicine 22(7):787–795.Google Scholar
Bridges, JF, Hauber, AB, Marshall, D, et al. (2011) Conjoint analysis applications in health—a checklist: A report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value in Health 14(4):403–413.Google Scholar
Casarett, D, Fishman, J, O'Dwyer, PJ, et al. (2008) How should we design supportive cancer care? The patient's perspective. Journal of Clinical Oncology 26(8):1296–1301Google Scholar
Chambers, M (2017) Engaging patients and public in decision-making: Approaches to achieving this in a complex environment. Health Expectations 20(2):185–187.Google Scholar
Clark, MD, Determann, D, Petrou, S, et al. (2014) Discrete choice experiments in health economics: A review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics 32(9):883–902.Google Scholar
Coast, J, Al-Janabi, H, Sutton, EJ, et al. (2012) Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: Issues and recommendations. Health Economics 21(6):730–741.Google Scholar
Douglas, H-R, Normand, CE, Higginson, IJ, et al. (2005) A new approach to eliciting patients' preferences for palliative day care: The choice experiment method. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 29(5):435–445.Google Scholar
Eagle, LM and de Vries, K (2005) Exploration of the decision-making process for inpatient hospice admissions. Journal of Advanced Nursing 52(6):584–591.Google Scholar
Epstein, RM and Gramling, RE (2013) What is shared in shared decision making? Complex decisions when the evidence is unclear. Medical Care Research and Review 70(1 suppl):94S–112S.Google Scholar
Farrar, S, Ryan, M, Ross, D, et al. (2000) Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments. Social Science & Medicine 50(1):63–75.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, EA, Bilger, M, Flynn, TN, et al. (2015) Preferences for end-of-life care among community-dwelling older adults and patients with advanced cancer: A discrete choice experiment. Health Policy 119(11):1482–1489.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, E, Malhotra, C, Chay, J, et al. (2016) Impact of treatment subsidies and cash payouts on treatment choices at the end of life. Value in Health 19(6):788–794.Google Scholar
Fitzsimons, D, Mullan, D, Wilson, J, et al. (2007) The challenge of patients' unmet palliative care needs in the final stages of chronic illness. Palliative Medicine 21(4):313–322.Google Scholar
Gomes, B, de Brito, M, Sarmento, VP, et al. (2017) Valuing attributes of home palliative care with service users: A pilot discrete choice experiment. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 54(6):973–985.Google Scholar
Grande, GE, Addington-Hall, JM, Todd, CJ (1998) Place of death and access to home care services: Are certain patient groups at a disadvantage? Social Science & Medicine 47(5):565–579.Google Scholar
Hall, J, Kenny, P, Hossain, I, et al. (2014) Providing informal care in terminal illness: an analysis of preferences for support using a discrete choice experiment. Medical Decision Making 34(6):731–745.Google Scholar
Herrmann, A, Sanson-Fisher, R, Hall, A, et al. (2018) A discrete choice experiment to assess cancer patients’ preferences for when and how to make treatment decisions. Supportive Care in Cancer 26(4):1215–1220.Google Scholar
International Association of Hospice and Palliative Care (2018) Global Directory of Palliative Care Services and Organizations. https://hospicecare.com/global-directory-of-providers-organizations/. Accessed June 25, 2018.Google Scholar
Islam, R, Weir, C, Del Fiol, G (2014) Heuristics in managing complex clinical decision tasks in experts' decision making. IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics 186–193.Google Scholar
Kohler, RE, Lee, CN, Gopal, S, et al. (2015) Developing a discrete choice experiment in Malawi: Eliciting preferences for breast cancer early detection services. Patient Preference and Adherence 9, 1459–1471.Google Scholar
Kuziemsky, C (2016) Decision-making in healthcare as a complex adaptive system. Healthcare Management Forum 29(1):4–7.Google Scholar
Malhotra, C, Farooqui, MA, Kanesvaran, R, et al. (2015) Comparison of preferences for end-of-life care among patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers: A discrete choice experiment. Palliative Medicine 29(9):842–850.Google Scholar
Mark, TL and Swait, J (2004) Using stated preference and revealed preference modeling to evaluate prescribing decisions. Health Economics 13(6):563–573.Google Scholar
Meads, DM, O'Dwyer, JL, Hulme, CT, et al. (2017) Patient preferences for pain management in advanced cancer: Results from a discrete choice experiment. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 10(5):643–651.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, N, Coxon, H, Nabarro, S, et al. (2016) Unmet care needs in people living with advanced cancer: A systematic review. Supportive Care in Cancer 24(8):3609–3622.Google Scholar
Molassiotis, A, Emsley, R, Ashcroft, D, et al. (2012) Applying best–worst scaling methodology to establish delivery preferences of a symptom supportive care intervention in patients with lung cancer. Lung Cancer 77(1):199–204.Google Scholar
Mühlbacher, AC, Lincke, H-J, Nübling, M (2008) Evaluating patients' preferences for multiple myeloma therapy, a Discrete-Choice-Experiment. Psycho-Social Medicine 5, Doc10.Google Scholar
O'Neill, J and Marconi, K (2001) Access to palliative care in the USA: Why emphasize vulnerable populations? Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 94(9):452–454.Google Scholar
Orme, BK (2010) Getting started with conjoint analysis: strategies for product design and pricing research. Santa Clara, CA: Research Publisher.Google Scholar
Osoba, D, Hsu, M-A, Copley-Merriman, C, et al. (2006) Stated preferences of patients with cancer for health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) domains during treatment. Quality of Life Research 15(2):273–283.Google Scholar
Reed Johnson, F, Lancsar, E, Marshall, D, et al. (2013) Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: Report of the ISPOR conjoint analysis experimental design good research practices task force. Value in Health 16(1):3–13.Google Scholar
Russell, B, Sundararajan, V, Hennesy-Anderson, N, et al. (2018) Responding to urgency of need in: Initial qualitative stage in the development of a triage tool for use in palliative care services. Palliative Medicine 32(7):1246–1254.Google Scholar
Ryan, M (2004) Discrete choice experiments in health care. British Journal of Medicine 328(7436):360–361.Google Scholar
Train, KE (2009) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Oxford, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Viney, R, Lancsar, E, Louviere, J (2002) Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research 2(4):319–326.Google Scholar
Walshe, C, Todd, C, Caress, A, et al. (2009) Patterns of access to community palliative care services: A literature review. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 37(5):884–912.Google Scholar
Willis, GB (2004) Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Wong, SF, Norman, R, Dunning, TL, et al. (2014) A protocol for a discrete choice experiment: Understanding preferences of patients with cancer towards their cancer care across metropolitan and rural regions in Australia. British Medical Journal Open 4(10):e006661.Google Scholar