Dataset Information

What sort of follow-up services would Australian breast cancer survivors prefer if we could no longer offer long-term specialist-based care? A discrete choice experiment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Early diagnosis and improved treatment outcomes have increased breast cancer survival rates that, in turn, have led to increased numbers of women undergoing follow-up after completion of primary treatment. The current workload growth is unsustainable for breast cancer specialists who also provide care for women newly diagnosed or with a recurrence. Appropriate and acceptable follow-up care is important; yet, currently we know little about patient preferences. The aim of this study was to explore the preferences of Australian breast cancer survivors for alternative modes of delivery of follow-up services.

Methods

A self-administered questionnaire (online or paper) was developed. The questionnaire contained a discrete choice experiment (DCE) designed to explore patient preferences with respect to provider, location, frequency and method of delivery of routine follow-up care in years 3, 4 and 5 after diagnosis, as well as the perceived value of 'drop-in' clinics providing additional support. Participants were recruited throughout Australia over a 6-month period from May to October 2012. Preference scores and choice probabilities were used to rank the top 10 most preferred follow-up scenarios for respondents.

Results

A total of 836 women participated in the study, of whom 722 (86.4%) completed the DCE. In the absence of specialist follow-up, the 10 most valued surveillance scenarios all included a Breast Physician as the provider of follow-up care. The most preferred scenario is a face-to-face local breast cancer follow-up clinic held every 6 months and led by a Breast Physician, where additional clinics focused on the side effects of treatment are also provided.

Conclusion

Beyond the first 2 years from diagnosis, in the absence of a specialist led follow-up, women prefer to have their routine breast cancer follow-up by a Breast Physician (or a Breast Cancer Nurse) in a dedicated local breast cancer clinic, rather than with their local General Practitioner. Drop-in clinics for the management of treatment related side effects and to provide advice to both develop and maintain good health are also highly valued by breast cancer survivors.

SUBMITTER: Bessen T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3929879 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What sort of follow-up services would Australian breast cancer survivors prefer if we could no longer offer long-term specialist-based care? A discrete choice experiment.

Bessen T T Chen G G Street J J Eliott J J Karnon J J Keefe D D Ratcliffe J J

British journal of cancer 20140114 4

<h4>Background</h4>Early diagnosis and improved treatment outcomes have increased breast cancer survival rates that, in turn, have led to increased numbers of women undergoing follow-up after completion of primary treatment. The current workload growth is unsustainable for breast cancer specialists who also provide care for women newly diagnosed or with a recurrence. Appropriate and acceptable follow-up care is important; yet, currently we know little about patient preferences. The aim of this s ...[more]

PMID: 24423927

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesIdentify Australian public preferences for antibiotic treatments in the context of antibiotic stewardship.MethodsA discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted in Australia to investigate the importance of seven attributes associated with antibiotic treatments and related stewardship practices: contribution to antimicrobial resistance (AMR), treatment duration, side effects, days needed to recover, days before taking antibiotics, treatment failure and out-of-pocket costs. The DCE data were analysed using conditional logit, mixed logit and latent class conditional logit models. The relative importance of each attribute was calculated.ResultsA total of 1882 respondents completed the survey; the main study sample consist of 1658 respondents (mean age 48 years) who passed quality checks. All seven attributes significantly influenced respondents' preferences for antibiotic treatments. Based on the designed attribute levels in the DCE, on average, out-of-pocket costs (32.8%) and contribution to antibiotic resistance (30.3%) were the most important attributes, followed by side effects (12.9%). Days before starting medication was least important (3.9%). Three latent classes were identified. Class 1 (including respondents who were more likely to be older and more health literate; 24.5%) gave contribution to antibiotic resistance greater importance in treatment preferences. Class 2 (including respondents more likely to report poorer health; 25.2%) gave out-of-pocket costs greater importance. The remaining (50.4%), who were generally healthier, perceived side effects as the most important attribute.ConclusionsDespite concerted public awareness raising campaigns, our results suggest that several factors may influence the preferences of Australians when considering antibiotic use. However, for those more likely to be aware of the need to preserve antibiotics, out-of-pocket costs and limiting the contribution to antibiotic resistance are the dominant influence. Delays in starting treatment were not important for any latent class, suggesting public tolerance for this measure. These results could help inform strategies to promote prudent antibiotic stewardship.

Project description:IntroductionFollow-up care is important for gastric cancer survivors, but follow-up strategies for gastric cancer survivors remain inconsistent, and compliance of gastric cancer survivors with follow-up care is very low. Understanding the needs and preferences of gastric cancer survivors is conducive to developing appropriate and acceptable follow-up strategies, thereby improving patient compliance. Discrete choice experiments can quantify individual needs and preferences. However, to date, there is no discrete choice experiment on the preferences of gastric cancer survivors, and no studies have examined how gastric cancer survivors make choices based on different characteristics of follow-up. This paper outlines an ongoing discrete choice experiment that aims to (1) explore follow-up service-related characteristics that may affect gastric cancer survivors' choices about their follow-up, (2) elicit how gastric cancer survivors consider the trade-offs among different follow-up service options using discrete choice experiment, (3) determine whether gastric cancer survivors' needs and preferences for follow-up vary due to the economy, politics, technology and culture in different regions.Methods and analysisSix attributes were developed through a literature review, semistructured interviews and experts and focus group discussions. A fractional factorial design was used to evaluate the interaction between attributes. A multiple logit model will be used to understand the trade-off between the follow-up characteristics of gastric cancer survivors. A mixed logit model will be used to explore the willingness to pay and uptake rate of gastric cancer survivors for follow-up attributes and further explore the preferences of different groups.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the ethics committee of the School of Nursing, Jilin University. The results of this study will be shared through online blogs, policy briefs, seminars and peer-reviewed journal articles and will be used to modify the current strategy of gastric cancer survivors' follow-up services according to economic development and regional culture.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in Australia. Guidelines suggest that patients with suspected lung cancer on thoracic imaging be referred for urgent specialist review. However, the term "suspected" is broad and includes the common finding of lung nodules, which often require periodic surveillance rather than urgent invasive investigation. The British Thoracic Society recommends that a lung nodule with a PanCan risk > 10% be considered for invasive investigation. This study aimed to assess which factors influence general practitioners (GPs) to request urgent review for a lung nodule and if these factors concur with PanCan risk prediction model variables. METHODS:A discrete choice experiment was developed that produced 32 individual case vignettes. Each vignette contained eight variables, four of which form the parsimonious PanCan risk prediction model. Two additional vignettes were created that addressed haemoptysis with a normal chest computed tomography (CT) scan and isolated mediastinal lymphadenopathy. The survey was distributed to 4160 randomly selected Australian GPs and they were asked if the patients in the vignettes required urgent (less than two weeks) specialist review. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with request for urgent review. RESULTS:Completed surveys were received from 3.7% of participants, providing 152 surveys (1216 case vignettes) for analysis. The factors associated with request for urgent review were nodule spiculation (adj-OR 5.57, 95% CI 3.88-7.99, p < 0.0001), larger nodule size, presentation with haemoptysis (adj-OR 4.79, 95% CI 3.05-7.52, p < 0.0001) or weight loss (adj-OR 4.87, 95% CI 3.13-7.59, p < 0.0001), recommendation for urgent review by the reporting radiologist (adj-OR 4.68, 95% CI 2.86-7.65, p < 0.0001) and female GP gender (adj-OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.36-2.56, p 0.0001). In low risk lung nodules (PanCan risk < 10%), there was significant variability in perceived sense of urgency. Most GPs (83%) felt that a patient with haemoptysis and a normal chest CT scan did not require urgent specialist review but that a patient with isolated mediastinal lymphadenopathy did (75%). CONCLUSION:Future lung cancer investigation pathways may benefit from the addition of a risk prediction model to reduce variations in referral behavior for low risk lung nodules.

Project description:PurposeStudies on healthy lifestyle interventions in survivors of colorectal cancer have been disappointing, demonstrating only modest changes. This study aims to quantify people's preferences for different aspects of dietary intervention.MethodA best-worst discrete choice experiment was designed and incorporated into a questionnaire including participants' characteristics and a self-assessment of lifestyle.ResultsThe response rate was 68% and 179 questionnaires were analysed. When analysing aggregate preferences, the modes of information provision selected as the most preferred were "face-to-face" (willingness to pay (WTP) £63.97, p ≤ 0.001) and "telephone" (WTP £62.36, p < 0.001) discussions whereas group discussions were preferred least (WTP -£118.96, p ≤ 0.001). Scenarios that included hospitals were most preferred (WTP £17.94, p = 0.031), and the favoured provider was bowel cancer nurses (WTP £75.11, p ≤ 0.001). When investigating preference heterogeneity, three sub-groups were identified: Firstly, "technophiles" preferring email (WTP £239.60, p ≤ 0.001) were male, were younger and had fewer risk factors. Secondly, a "one-to-one" group had strong preference for interventions over the telephone or at their local doctors and were older (WTP £642.13, p ≤ 0.001). Finally, a "person-centred" group preferred face-to-face individual or group sessions (WTP £358.79, p < 0.001) and had a high risk lifestyle.ConclusionFor survivors of colorectal cancer, there is not one approach that suits all when it comes to providing dietary advice.Implications for cancer survivorsThis is important information to consider when planning healthy lifestyle interventions which include dietary advice for survivors of colorectal cancer. Aligning services to individuals' preferences has the potential to improve patient experience and outcomes by increasing uptake of healthy lifestyle advice services and promoting a more tailored approach to dietary modifications, acknowledging sub-groups of people within the total population of colorectal cancer survivors.

Project description:BackgroundNurse practitioners play a critical role in improving the access to care and in meeting the needs for health care. However, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the average turnover rate of nurse practitioners was 10 % with associated total direct cost that ranged from $85,832 to $114,919 for each episode of turnover in the United States. Little is known about the job preference of nurse practitioners and the cost savings to an organization that provides jobs with characteristics attractive to nurse practitioners.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify the preferred job characteristics that are associated with nurse practitioners' job choices; and to determine the extent to which nurse practitioners would need to be compensated for practicing without these characteristics.DesignA two-stage design using a mixed method approach.Setting(s)The state of Georgia in the United States.Participants2757 nurse practitioners who were actively licensed were invited to participate. Of the 412 participants, 372 actively employed in Georgia were included in the analysis.MethodsA 2-stage discrete choice experiment was designed. Stage-1 was a qualitative design using a focus group to identify nurse practitioners' preferred job characteristics. Stage-2 was a quantitative design using survey distribution and analysis. A mixed logit model was used for ranking nurse practitioners' preferred job characteristics and the extent to which they would need to be compensated.ResultsOn average nurse practitioners were 47.4 years of age; the majority were female (90 %), white (75.3 %), and educated at the master's level (88.7 %). Participants did not value teams that were not very cohesive (β = -1.50); administration that was not very responsive and supportive (β = -1.04); being supervised by a physician (β = -0.58); not having their own panel of patients (β = -0.42); and not billing under their own National Provider Identifier (β = -0.18). Participants would need an increase in annual income of USD$21,780 for practicing in a not very cohesive team; USD$15,280 for practicing with a not very responsive administration; and USD$21,450 for being supervised by a physician.ConclusionsA cohesive, responsive, and supportive working environment and being able to practice independently are important characteristics for nurse practitioners when choosing a job. Healthcare managers should provide a workplace culture that reflects these preferred job characteristics to attract and retain nurse practitioners. Policymakers should consider reforming the scope of practice legislation to promote the independent practice of nurse practitioners.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:It is desirable that public preferences are established and incorporated in emergency healthcare reforms. The aim of this study was to investigate preferences for local versus centralised provision of all emergency medical services (EMS) and explore what individuals think are important considerations for EMS delivery. DESIGN:A discrete choice experiment was conducted. The attributes used in the choice scenarios were: travel time to the hospital, waiting time to be seen, length of stay in the hospital, risks of dying, readmission and opportunity for outpatient care after emergency treatment at a local hospital. SETTING:North East England. PARTICIPANTS:Participants were a randomly sampled general population, aged 16 years or above recruited from Healthwatch Northumberland network database of lay members and from clinical contact with Northumbria Healthcare National Health Service Foundation Trust via Patient Experience Team. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Analysis used logistic regression modelling techniques to determine the preference of each attribute. Marginal rates of substitution between attributes were estimated to understand the trade-offs individuals were willing to make. RESULTS:Responses were obtained from 148 people (62 completed a web and 86 a postal version). Respondents preferred shorter travel time to hospital, shorter waiting time, fewer number of days in hospital, low risk of death, low risk of readmission and outpatient follow-up care in their local hospital. However, individuals were willing to trade off increased travel time and waiting time for high-quality centralised care. Individuals were willing to travel 9 min more for a 1-day reduction in length of stay in the hospital, 38 min for a 1% reduction in risk of death and 112 min for having outpatient follow-up care at their local hospital. CONCLUSIONS:People value centralised EMS if it provides higher quality care and are willing to travel further and wait longer.

Dataset Information

What sort of follow-up services would Australian breast cancer survivors prefer if we could no longer offer long-term specialist-based care? A discrete choice experiment.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

What sort of follow-up services would Australian breast cancer survivors prefer if we could no longer offer long-term specialist-based care? A discrete choice experiment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets