Search

Increasing the contribution of pharmacists to primary care has been long discussed, particularly in the context of health workforce shortages and the push to better integrate all providers across primary care. This study examines the employment preferences of Australian pharmacy degree holders (PDHs) elicited through a discrete choice experiment (DCE), to better understand the drivers of current labour force choices. A labelled DCE was developed incorporating the six employment sectors: hospital pharmacy, community pharmacy, primary healthcare settings, pharmaceutical industry, government/academia, and non-pharmacy-related sector. Each alternative was described by five attributes using Herzberg's Two Factor Theory as a conceptual framework. They include motivators - role and career opportunities, and hygiene factors-flexible work schedule, geographic location, and salary. Unforced choice data were analysed using conditional logit and mixed logit models. Based on a sample of 678 PDHs in Australia, our findings indicated pharmaceutical industry is the least preferred sector, followed by non-pharmacy-related sector. Motivators in the form of role and career opportunities are the most important attributes in hospital pharmacy while hygiene factors - geographic location and salary significantly drive the choice of community pharmacy and primary care settings. We provided evidence of a willingness to adopt expanded roles in community pharmacy. This unique interpretation of the key drivers of employment preference in light of motivators and hygiene factors provides policy makers with important information when designing policies to attract and retain PDHs across employment sectors., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Health programs/services are often bundled, allowing for both substitution and complementarity. We adapt Discrete Choice Experiments to capture bundling, with application to a case study of exercise and nutrition; complementarity arises due to the goal of improving health. Our contributions are (1) to present a menu-based choice experiment to explore bundling; (2) to analyse the menu-based data using an extension of the choice set generation model (GenL) to account for correlations between bundles and component singles. A nationally representative sample of 333 Australians chose between a nutrition program only; exercise program only; both nutrition and exercise programs; or their status quo. Overall, we show that by incorporating the menu choice task and introducing the combined alternative, we capture a significant portion of the population seeking both exercise and nutrition components. We estimate a latent class GenL model, and identify two latent classes: Class 1 preferred to choose programs on offer, and Class 2 was more price sensitive and had a stronger preference for staying with their status quo. We show in the post-estimation analysis that heterogeneity in preferences translates into heterogeneity in the way alternatives are bundled, indicating that the combined offering is appealing to specific classes of individuals who prefer bundling. By implementing the menu choice task, researchers and policymakers can effectively identify, cater to and influence the demand for combined exercise and nutrition options, leading to more targeted and impactful interventions in promoting healthier lifestyle choices., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

People's time is a limited resource and, in economic evaluations that adopt a societal perspective, it is important that it is valued and accounted for. Yet, in economic evaluations of interventions for children and young people (CYP), attempts to take into account the opportunity cost of their time are rare. To understand why this is the case, we need to first understand what views health economists hold in relation to CYP time, and what challenges they face in incorporating this in their evaluations. We planned and carried out an international survey of health economists. We used a combination of approaches to identify potential survey respondents (the survey's sampling frame), we developed a questionnaire that sought to capture respondents' views and practice through close- and open-ended questions, we piloted the questionnaire through a series of cognitive interviews, and we e-mailed unique links to the final version of the questionnaire to 1956 individuals in the sampling frame. We analysed data using quantitative (descriptive and inferential statistics) and qualitative (thematic analysis) methods. We received 274 complete responses. Most respondents (87%) believe CYP time should be considered for inclusion in economic evaluations conducted from a societal perspective. However, they identify a number of obstacles to doing so, most prominently uncertainties around appropriate practice (e.g., when CYP's time should or should not be included in calculations), methodological gaps (e.g., what value to attach to CYP's time), and practical difficulties in measuring displaced time in CYP. Reporting on their own practice, most respondents found it challenging to consider CYP time in their studies, and stressed the need for clear guidance on when, and further research on how, to appropriately account for CYP's time in economic evaluations. We offer our views on how to move the topic forwards and make suggestions further research., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Despite unprecedented progress in developing COVID-19 vaccines, global vaccination levels needed to reach herd immunity remain a distant target, while new variants keep emerging. Obtaining near universal vaccine uptake relies on understanding and addressing vaccine resistance. Simple questions about vaccine acceptance however ignore that the vaccines being offered vary across countries and even population subgroups, and differ in terms of efficacy and side effects. By using advanced discrete choice models estimated on stated choice data collected in 18 countries/territories across six continents, we show a substantial influence of vaccine characteristics. Uptake increases if more efficacious vaccines (95% vs 60%) are offered (mean across study areas = 3.9%, range of 0.6%-8.1%) or if vaccines offer at least 12 months of protection (mean across study areas = 2.4%, range of 0.2%-5.8%), while an increase in severe side effects (from 0.001% to 0.01%) leads to reduced uptake (mean = -1.3%, range of -0.2% to -3.9%). Additionally, a large share of individuals (mean = 55.2%, range of 28%-75.8%) would delay vaccination by 3 months to obtain a more efficacious (95% vs 60%) vaccine, where this increases further if the low efficacy vaccine has a higher risk (0.01% instead of 0.001%) of severe side effects (mean = 65.9%, range of 41.4%-86.5%). Our work highlights that careful consideration of which vaccines to offer can be beneficial. In support of this, we provide an interactive tool to predict uptake in a country as a function of the vaccines being deployed, and also depending on the levels of infectiousness and severity of circulating variants of COVID-19., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose and Setting: Despite the label "generic" health state utility instruments (HSUIs), empirical evidence shows that different HSUIs generate different estimates of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in the same person. Once a HSUI is used to generate a QALY, the difference between HSUIs is often ignored, and decision-makers act as if 'a QALY is a QALY is a QALY'. Complementing evidence that different generic HSUIs produce different empirical values, this study addresses an important gap by exploring how HSUIs differ, and processes that produced this difference. 15 developers of six generic HSUIs used for estimating the QOL component of QALYs: Quality of Well-Being (QWB) scale; 15 Dimension instrument (15D); Health Utilities Index (HUI); EuroQol EQ-5D; Short Form-6 Dimension (SF-6D), and the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) were interviewed in 2012-2013., Principal Findings: We identified key factors involved in shaping each instrument, and the rationale for similarities and differences across measures. While HSUIs have a common purpose, they are distinctly discrete constructs. Developers recalled complex developmental processes, grounded in unique histories, and these backgrounds help to explain different pathways taken at key decision points during the HSUI development. The basis for the HSUIs was commonly not equivalent conceptually: differently valued concepts and goals drove instrument design and development, according to each HSUI's defined purpose. Developers drew from different sources of knowledge to develop their measure depending on their conceptualisation of HRQoL., Major Conclusions/contribution to Knowledge: We generated and analysed first-hand accounts of the development of the HSUIs to provide insight, beyond face value, about how and why such instruments differ. Findings enhance our understanding of why the six instruments developed the way they did, from the perspective of key developers of those instruments. Importantly, we provide additional, original explanation for why a QALY is not a QALY is not a QALY., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Evidence surrounding utilities for health states, derived either directly from the application of preference-based valuation methods or indirectly from the application of preference-based quality of life instruments, is increasingly being utilised to inform the cost-effectiveness of child health interventions. Proxy (parent or health professional) assessments are common in this area. This study sought to investigate the degree of convergence in childhood utilities generated directly or indirectly within dyad child and proxy assessments., Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive literature search strategy conducted across six search engines (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsychoINFO, EconLit, CINAHL and Cochrane Library). Original peer-reviewed articles that reported utilities derived directly or indirectly using simultaneous dyad child and proxy assessments were extracted. Mean and median utilities, correlation coefficients and levels of agreement were extracted, catalogued and assessed., Results: A total of 35 studies that reported utilities for two or more respondent types were identified. Of these, 29 studies reported dyad childhood self-report and proxy utilities whilst six studies reported levels of agreement and/or correlations only without documenting overall utilities. Proxy assessment was most often conducted by parents with the HUI3 representing the most commonly applied instrument across a range of health conditions. The utilities derived from child and parent proxy assessment were bidirectional with parental proxies tending to underestimate and health professional proxies tending to overestimate relative to child self-reports. Inter-rater agreement between child self-reports and parent-proxy reports were poorer for more subjective attributes (cognition, emotion and pain), relative to physical attributes (mobility, self-care, speech, vision) of health-related quality of life., Conclusions: Childhood utilities derived from children or proxies are not interchangeable. The choice of self or proxy assessor may have potentially significant implications for economic evaluations of child health interventions., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

An increase in sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) prices has been suggested to reduce SSB intake to improve population health. Using a discrete choice experiment, we tested the effect of price changes on beverage choices in an online hypothetical convenience store setting amongst 1,008 Australian adults in May to June 2016. From this we calculated pre-packaged beverage price elasticities overall and for health policy-target consumer subgroups; and identified consumer subgroups likely to be most reactive to beverage price changes. Using mixed logit analysis, we found similar price elasticities for age, gender and income groups. More frequent SSB consumers tended to be less sensitive to SSB price changes. Latent class analysis revealed five consumer groups, none of which fit the desirable policy-target of highly price sensitive, frequent SSB consumers. An improved understanding of responsiveness to beverage price changes and consumer preferences could improve predictions of whose health is likely to benefit most from pricing interventions., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In most societies resources are insufficient to provide everyone with all the health care they want. In practice, this means that some people are given priority over others. On what basis should priority be given? In this paper we are interested in the general public's views on this question. We set out to synthesis what the literature has found as a whole regarding which attributes or factors the general public think should count in priority setting and what weight they should receive. A systematic review was undertaken (in August 2014) to address these questions based on empirical studies that elicited stated preferences from the general public. Sixty four studies, applying eight methods, spanning five continents met the inclusion criteria. Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) and Person Trade-off (PTO) were the most popular standard methods for preference elicitation, but only 34% of all studies calculated distributional weights, mainly using PTO. While there is heterogeneity, results suggest the young are favoured over the old, the more severely ill are favoured over the less severely ill, and people with self-induced illness or high socioeconomic status tend to receive lower priority. In those studies that considered health gain, larger gain is universally preferred, but at a diminishing rate. Evidence from the small number of studies that explored preferences over different components of health gain suggests life extension is favoured over quality of life enhancement; however this may be reversed at the end of life. The majority of studies that investigated end of life care found weak/no support for providing a premium for such care. The review highlights considerable heterogeneity in both methods and results. Further methodological work is needed to achieve the goal of deriving robust distributional weights for use in health care priority setting., (Crown Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Consumer directed care (CDC) is currently being embraced internationally as a means to promote autonomy and choice for consumers (people aged 65 and over) receiving community aged care services (CACSs). CDC involves giving CACS clients (consumers and informal carers of consumers) control over how CACSs are administered. However, CDC models have largely developed in the absence of evidence on clients' views and preferences. We explored CACS clients' preferences for a variety of CDC attributes and identified factors that may influence these preferences and potentially inform improved design of future CDC models. Study participants were clients of CACSs delivered by five Australian providers. Using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) approach undertaken in a group setting between June and December 2013, we investigated the relative importance to CACS consumers and informal (family) carers of gradations relating to six salient features of CDC (choice of service provider(s), budget management, saving unused/unspent funds, choice of support/care worker(s), support-worker flexibility and level of contact with service coordinator). The DCE data were analysed using conditional, mixed and generalised logit regression models, accounting for preference and scale heterogeneity. Mean ages for 117 study participants were 80 years (87 consumers) and 74 years (30 informal carers). All participants preferred a CDC approach that allowed them to: save unused funds from a CACS package for future use; have support workers that were flexible in terms of changing activities within their CACS care plan and; choose the support workers that provide their day-to-day CACSs. The CDC attributes found to be important to both consumers and informal carers receiving CACSs will inform the design of future CDC models of service delivery. The DCE approach used in this study has the potential for wide applicability and facilitates the assessment of preferences for elements of potential future aged care service delivery not yet available in policy., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A key objective of discrete choice experiments is to obtain sufficient quantity of high quality choice data to estimate choice models to be used to explore various policy/clinically relevant issues. This paper focuses on a relatively new form of choice experiment, 'Best Worst Discrete Choice Experiments' (BWDCEs) and their relevance to health research as a new way to meet such an objective. We explain what BWDCEs are, how and when to apply them and we present several analytical approaches to model the resulting data. We demonstrate this preference elicitation approach in an empirical application exploring preferences of 898 members of the general public in Edmonton and Calgary, Canada for treatment of cardiac arrest occurring in a public place and show the gains achieved compared to traditional analysis of first best data. We suggest that BWDCEs are a valuable way to investigate preferences in the health sector and discuss implications for task design, analysis and areas for future research., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

There is growing use of discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to investigate preferences for products and programs and for the attributes that make up such products and programs. However, a fundamental issue overlooked in the interpretation of many choice experiments is that attribute parameters estimated from DCE response data are confounded with the underlying subjective scale of the utilities, and strictly speaking cannot be interpreted as the relative "weight" or "impact" of the attributes, as is frequently done in the health economics literature. As such, relative attribute impact cannot be compared using attribute parameter size and significance. Instead, to investigate the relative impact of each attribute requires commensurable measurement units; that is, a common, comparable scale. We present and demonstrate empirically a menu of five methods that allow such comparisons: (1) partial log-likelihood analysis; (2) the marginal rate of substitution for non-linear models; (3) Hicksian welfare measures; (4) probability analysis; and (5) best-worst attribute scaling. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each method and suggest circumstances in which each is appropriate.