Eliciting preferences for outpatient care experiences in Hungary: A discrete choice experiment with a national representative sample

Women's preference to apply shared decision-making in breast cancer screening: a discrete choice experiment

OBJECTIVE

To analyse women's stated preferences for establishing the relative importance of each attribute of shared decision-making (SDM) and their willingness to pay (WTP) for more participatory care in breast cancer screening programmes (BCSP).

DESIGN

A discrete choice experiment was designed with 12 questions (choice tasks). It included three attributes: 'How the information is obtained', regarding benefits and harms; whether there is a 'Dialogue for scheduled mammography' between the healthcare professional and the woman; and, 'Who makes the decision', regarding participation in BCSP. Data were obtained using a survey that included 12 choice tasks, 1 question on WTP and 7 socioeconomic-related questions. The analysis was performed using conditional mixed-effect logit regression and stratification according to WTP.

SETTING

Data collection related to BCSP was conducted between June and November 2021 in Catalonia, Spain.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-five women aged between 50 and 60.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Women's perceived utility of each attribute, trade-off on these attributes and WTP for SDM in BCSP.

RESULT

The only significant attribute was 'Who makes the decision'. The decision made alone (coefficient=2.879; 95% CI=2.297 to 3.461) and the decision made together with a healthcare professional (2.375; 95% CI=1.573 to 3.177) were the options preferred by women. The former contributes 21% more utility than the latter. Moreover, 52.3% of the women stated a WTP of €10 or more for SDM. Women's preferences regarding attributes did not influence their WTP.

CONCLUSIONS

The participant women refused a current paternalistic model and preferred either SDM or informed decision-making in BCSP.

Patient-centred care in Hungary: Contributions to foster a policy agenda

In Hungary, the National Health Insurance Fund provides health care coverage for nearly all residents, but healthcare spending is below the EU's average (6.4% versus 9.9% of the GDP in 2019, respectively). In 1997, patients' rights were established by laws of the healthcare system. The patients' voice, however, has remained weakly embedded in decision-making processes both on the system and individual patient levels. Policy progress achieved in the past years may foster patient-centeredness in health policy decision-making. However, people-reported data are not yet embedded in the Hungarian health information system and national population or household surveys, thus undermining the monitoring of the performance of the health system regarding patient-centred aspects. From the academic research side, several advances have occurred regarding the availability of validated instruments for the measurement of patient-centred aspects. These recent studies have placed Hungary in a uniquely advanced position compared with other countries in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region. The use of those instruments in clinical guidelines and practices, to the education curricula of future health workers, is still in an early stage.

Self-Reported Waiting Times for Outpatient Health Care Services in Hungary: Results of a Cross-Sectional Survey on a National Representative Sample

(1) Background: System-level data on waiting time in the outpatient setting in Hungary is scarce. The objective of the study was to explore self-reported waiting time for an appointment and at a doctor’s office. (2) Methods: An online, cross-sectional, self-administered survey was carried out in 2019 in Hungary among a representative sample (n = 1000) of the general adult population. Chi-squared test and logistic regression analysis were carried out to explore if socioeconomic characteristics, health status, or residence were associated with waiting times and the perception of waiting time as a problem. (3) Results: Proportions of 90%, 41%, and 64% of respondents were seen within a week by family doctor, public specialist, and private specialist, respectively. One-third of respondents waited more than a month to get an appointment with a public specialist. Respondents in better health status reported shorter waiting times; those respondents were less likely to perceive a problem with: (1) waiting time to get an appointment (OR = 0.400) and (2) waiting time at a doctor’s office (OR = 0.519). (4) Conclusions: Longest waiting times were reported for public specialist visits, but waiting times were favorable for family doctors and private specialists. Further investigation is needed to better understand potential inequities affecting people in worse health status.

Understanding the use of patient-reported data by health care insurers: A scoping review

Background

Patient-reported data are widely used for many purposes by different actors within a health system. However, little is known about the use of such data by health insurers. Our study aims to map the evidence on the use of patient-reported data by health insurers; to explore how collected patient-reported data are utilized; and to elucidate the motives of why patient-reported data are collected by health insurers.

Methods

The study design is that of a scoping review. In total, 11 databases were searched on. Relevant grey literature was identified through online searches, reference mining and recommendations from experts. Forty-two documents were included. We synthesized the evidence on the uses of patient-reported data by insurers following a structure-process-outcome approach; we also mapped the use and function of those data by a health insurer.

Results

Health insurers use patient-reported data for assurance and improvement of quality of care and value-based health care. The patient-reported data most often collected are those of outcomes, experiences and satisfaction measures; structure indicators are used to a lesser extent and often combined with process indicators. These data are mainly used for the purposes of procurement and purchasing of services, quality assurance, improvement and reporting, and strengthening the involvement of insured people.

Conclusions

The breadth to which insurers use patient-reported data in their business models varies greatly. Some hindering factors to the uptake of such data are the varying and overlapping terminology in use in the field and the limited involvement of insured people in a health insurer’s business. Health insurers are advised to be more explicit in regard to the role they want to play within the health system and society at large, and accommodate implications for the use of patient-reported data accordingly.