Exploring consumer values of comparative performance information for hospital choice

Quality in Primary Care

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 81-89

  Ketelaar, Nicole A B M ^a   Faber, Marjan J ^a   Westert, Gert P ^a   Elwyn, Glyn ^b   Braspenning, Jozé C ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b DARTMOUTH INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH POLICY AND CLINICAL PRACTICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice behaviour; Comparative performance information; Consumer values; Qualitative research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONSUMER; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTION; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONSUMER SATISFACTION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTION; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

EID: 84898645117     PISSN: 14791072     EISSN: 14791064     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Robertson R and Burge P. The impact of patient choice of provider on equity: analysis of a patient survey. Journal of Health Services Research & Polic. 2011; 16 Suppl 1:22-8.
2. Victoor A, Delnoij DM, Friele RD and Rademakers JJ. Determinants of patient choice of healthcare providers: a scoping review. BMC Health Services Research 2012; 12:272.
3. Victoor A, Friele RD, Delnoij DM and Rademakers JJ. Free choice of healthcare providers in the Netherlands is both a goal in itself and a precondition: modelling the policy assumptions underlying the promotion of patient choice through documentary analysis and interviews. BMC Health Services Researc. 2012; 12(1):441.
4. Fredriksson M. Is patient choice democratising Swedish primary care? Health Polic. 2013; 111 (1):95-98.
5. Hibbard JH, Greene J and Daniel D. What is quality anyway? Performance reports that clearly communicate to consumers the meaning of quality of care. Medical Care Research and Revie. 2010; 67:275-93.
6. Werner RM and Asch DA. The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information. JAM. 2005; 293:1239-44.
7. Fasolo B, Reutskaja E, Dixon A and Boyce T. Helping patients choose: how to improve the design of comparative scorecards of hospital quality. Patient Education and Counselin. 2010; 78:344-9.
8. Kaiser Family Foundation. Update on Consumers' View of Patient Safety and Quality Information. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: Menlo Park, CA, 2008.
9. Fanjiang G, von Glahn T, Chang H, Rogers WH and Safran DG. Providing patients web-based data to inform physician choice: if you build it, will they come? Journal of General Internal Medicin. 2007; 22:1463-6.
10. Harris KM and Buntin MB. Choosing a Health Care Provider: The role of quality information. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation: Princeton, NJ, 2008.
11. Berendsen AJ, de Jong GM, Meyboom-de Jong B, Dekker JH and Schuling J. Transition of care: experiences and preferences of patients across the primary/ secondary interface - a qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research 2009; 9:62.
12. Groenewoud AS. It's Your Choice! A study of search and selection processes, and the use of performance indicators in different patient groups. Erasmus University Rotterdam: Veenendaal, 2008.
13. Spranca M, Kanouse DE, Elliott M, Short P.F., Farley DO and Hays RD. Do consumer reports of health plan quality affect health plan selection? Health Services Researc. 2000; 35:933-47.
14. Kolstad JT and Chernew ME. Quality and consumer decision making in the market for health insurance and health care services. Medical Care Research and Revie. 2009; 66(1 Suppl):28S-52S.
15. Faber M, Bosch M, Wollersheim H., Leatherman S and Grol R. Public reporting in health care: how do consumers use quality-of-care information? A systematic review. Medical Car. 2009; 47:1-8.
16. Rademakers J, Nijman J, Brabers A.E., de Jong JD and Hendriks M. The relative effect of health literacy and patient activation on provider choice in the Netherlands. Health Polic. 2014; 114: 200-6.
17. Stein BD, Kogan JN, Essock S and Fudurich S. Views of mental health care consumers on public reporting of information on provider performance. Psychiatric Service. 2009; 60:689-92.
18. Damman OC, Hendriks M, Rademakers J., Spreeuwenberg P, Delnoij DM and Groenewegen PP. Consumers' interpretation and use of comparative information on the quality of health care: the effect of presentation approaches. Health Expectation. 2012; 15: 197-211.
19. Slovic P. The construction of preference. American Psychologis. 1995; 50:364-71.
20. Epstein RM and Peters E. Beyond information: exploring patients' preferences. JAM. 2009; 302:195-7.
21. Lee YK, Low WY and Ng CJ. Exploring patient values in medical decision making: a qualitative study. PloS On. 2013; 8(ll):e80051.
22. Krueger RA and Casey MA. Focus Groups: A practical guide for applied researcher. (3e). SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA, 2000.
23. Barbour R. Doing Focus Groups. SAGE: London, 2007.
24. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S and Birkmeyer JD. How do elderly patients decide where to go for major surgery? Telephone interview survey. British Medical Journa. 2005; 331 (7520):821.
25. Sheon N (2007) Overview of Atlas.ti.5.2. San Francisco. www.palmpal.org/atlas.pdf (accessed 05/03/14).
26. Buetow S. Thematic analysis and its reconceptualization as 'saliency analysis'. Journal of Health Services Research & Polic. 2010; 15:123-5.
27. Jepson R, Harris FM, Bowes A, Robertson R., Avan G and Sheikh A. Physical activity in South Asians: an in-depth qualitative study to explore motivations and facilitators. PloS On. 2012; 7(10):e45333.
28. Lichtenstein S and Slovic P. The Construction of Preference. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2006.
29. Peters E, Dieckmann NF, Vastfjall D, Mertz C.K., Slovic P and Hibbard JH. Bringing meaning to numbers: the impact of evaluative categories on decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applie. 2009; 15:213-27.
30. Moser A, Korstjens I, van der Weijden T and Tange H. Themes affecting health-care consumers' choice of a hospital for elective surgery when receiving web-based comparative consumer information. Patient Education and Counseling 2010; 78:365-71.
31. Epstein RM. Whole mind and shared mind in clinical decision-making. Patient Education and Counselin. 2013; 90:200-6.
32. Kaiser Family Foundation. A National Survey on Consumers' Experiences with Patient Safety and Quality Information. Kaiser Family Foundation: Menlo Park, CA, 2004.
33. Sinaiko AD. How do quality information and cost affect patient choice of provider in a tiered network setting? Results from a survey. Health Services Researc. 2011; 46:437-56.
34. Coulter A. Engaging Patients in Healthcare. Open University Press: Buckingham, 2011.
35. Dixon A, Robertson R, Appleby J., Burge P, Devlin N and Magee H. How Patients Choose and How Providers Respond. The King's Fund: London, 2010.
36. Groot de IB Otten W Smeets HJ et al. Is the impact of hospital performance data greater in patients who have compared hospitals. BMC Health Services Research 2011; 11:214.
37. Lako CJ and Rosenau P. Demand-driven care and hospital choice. Dutch health policy toward demand-driven care: results from a survey into hospital choice. Health Care Analysi. 2009; 17:20-35.
38. Meinow B, Parker MG and Thorslund M. Consumers of eldercare in Sweden: the semblance of choice. Social Science & Medicin. 2011; 73:1285-9.
39. Schlesinger M. Choice cuts: parsing policymakers' pursuit of patient empowerment from an individual perspective. Health Economics, Policy, and La. 2010; 5:365-87.