Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

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

  • Bethany Russell (a1) (a2) (a3), Sara Vogrin (a4), Jennifer Philip (a1) (a3) (a5), Nicole Hennessy-Anderson (a2), Anna Collins (a1), Jodie Burchell (a4), Brian Le (a5) (a6), Caroline Brand (a7) (a8), Peter Hudson (a2) (a9) (a10) and Vijaya Sundararajan (a2) (a4)...

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.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

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

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

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

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

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

Copyright

Corresponding author

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 beth.russell@svha.org.au

References

Hide All
Addington-Hall, J, Altmann, D, McCarthy, M (1998) Which terminally ill cancer patients receive hospice in-patient care? Social Science & Medicine 46(8):10111016.
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):799806.
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):787795.
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):403413.
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):12961301
Chambers, M (2017) Engaging patients and public in decision-making: Approaches to achieving this in a complex environment. Health Expectations 20(2):185187.
Clark, MD, Determann, D, Petrou, S, et al. (2014) Discrete choice experiments in health economics: A review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics 32(9):883902.
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):730741.
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):435445.
Eagle, LM and de Vries, K (2005) Exploration of the decision-making process for inpatient hospice admissions. Journal of Advanced Nursing 52(6):584591.
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):94S112S.
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):6375.
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):14821489.
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):788794.
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):313322.
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):973985.
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):565579.
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):731745.
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):12151220.
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.
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 186193.
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, 14591471.
Kuziemsky, C (2016) Decision-making in healthcare as a complex adaptive system. Healthcare Management Forum 29(1):47.
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):842850.
Mark, TL and Swait, J (2004) Using stated preference and revealed preference modeling to evaluate prescribing decisions. Health Economics 13(6):563573.
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):643651.
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):36093622.
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):199204.
Mühlbacher, AC, Lincke, H-J, Nübling, M (2008) Evaluating patients' preferences for multiple myeloma therapy, a Discrete-Choice-Experiment. Psycho-Social Medicine 5, Doc10.
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):452454.
Orme, BK (2010) Getting started with conjoint analysis: strategies for product design and pricing research. Santa Clara, CA: Research Publisher.
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):273283.
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):313.
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):12461254.
Ryan, M (2004) Discrete choice experiments in health care. British Journal of Medicine 328(7436):360361.
Train, KE (2009) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Oxford, UK: Cambridge University Press.
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):319326.
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):884912.
Willis, GB (2004) Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
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.

Keywords

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

  • Bethany Russell (a1) (a2) (a3), Sara Vogrin (a4), Jennifer Philip (a1) (a3) (a5), Nicole Hennessy-Anderson (a2), Anna Collins (a1), Jodie Burchell (a4), Brian Le (a5) (a6), Caroline Brand (a7) (a8), Peter Hudson (a2) (a9) (a10) and Vijaya Sundararajan (a2) (a4)...

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed