1
|
Gething K, Erku D, Scuffham P. Stakeholders' Decisions and Preferences for the Provision and Use of Medicinal Cannabis: A Scoping Review. Cannabis Cannabinoid Res 2023; 8:986-998. [PMID: 36888538 DOI: 10.1089/can.2022.0115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: The aim of this scoping review was to examine the extent that stakeholder's decisions about and preferences for the provision and use of medicinal cannabis (MC) had been investigated. We sought to identify which populations were examined, the methods used for eliciting preferences and exploring decisions, and the reported outcomes of studies. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, BSC and PsycINFO) and the reference lists of relevant articles were searched for studies published up to March 2022. Studies were included if stakeholder preferences for MC were (1) the primary focus of the research, or (2) an aspect of a larger preference focus. Studies that (3) described the decisions to use MC were also included. Results: Thirteen studies were reviewed. The population focus of these was primarily patient, with seven studies focused on general patient populations and five studies targeting specific patient populations such as cancer survivors, and people experiencing depression. Methods included health economics preference methods, qualitative interviews, and a single multicriteria decision-making study. Four categories of outcomes were defined and included comparisons of MC with a therapeutic alternative (n=5), preferences for MC attributes (n=5), administration preferences (n=4), and the decision process of users (n=2). Motivation differences in preference were found. Purely medicinal users and novice users place more importance on cannabidiol (CBD) than tetrahydrocannabinol. Overall, inhalation methods of administration were preferred due to quick onset of symptom relief. Price was the greatest influence on choice for recreational/medicinal users, whereas purely medicinal users were less price sensitive for products with higher CBD content. Conclusion: Studies examining public preferences for the provision and use of MC were absent. Revealed preference methods are a useful technique for understanding preferences for characteristics that are difficult to visibly assess such as cannabinoid or strain. The outcomes of symptom-specific multicriteria decision method studies that compare the benefit-safety profiles of commonly used treatments and MC may be a useful decision support tool for health practitioners. Studies with representative samples are needed to understand the impact of age, gender, and race on preferences for MC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katrina Gething
- Center for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
| | - Daniel Erku
- Center for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
| | - Paul Scuffham
- Center for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Erku D, Scuffham P, Gething K, Norman R, Mekonnen AB, Gebretekle GB, Assefa Y, Tessema GA. Stated Preference Research in Reproductive and Maternal Healthcare Services in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review. Patient 2021; 15:287-306. [PMID: 34713395 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00553-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Understanding the preferred choice of healthcare service attributes for women is important, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where resources are constrained and improving reproductive and maternal healthcare services is of high importance. The aim of this systematic review was to identify attributes of reproductive and maternal healthcare services in sub-Saharan Africa, and summarise the factors shaping women's preference to access these services. METHODS PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL were searched from the inception of each database until March 2021 for published studies reporting stated preferences for maternal and reproductive healthcare services in sub-Saharan Africa. Data were extracted using a predefined extraction sheet, and the quality of reporting of included studies was assessed using PREFS and ISPOR (International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research) checklists. The Donabedian's model for quality of healthcare was used to categorise attributes into "structure", "process" and "outcome". RESULTS A total of 13 studies (12 discrete choice experiments and one best-worst scaling study) were included. Attributes related to the structure of healthcare services (e.g. availability of technical equipment, medications or diagnostic facilities, having good system conditions) are often included within the studies, and are considered the most important by women. Of the three dimensions of quality of healthcare, the outcome dimension was the least frequently studied across studies. All except one study explored women's preferences and the participants were pregnant women, women aged 18-49 years who had recently given birth and women living with human immunodeficiency virus. The included studies came from five sub-Saharan Africa countries of which Ethiopia and South Africa each contributed three studies. All of the included studies reported on the purpose, findings and significance of the study. However, none of the studies reported on the differences between responders vs non-responders. Nine of the 13 studies employed the ISPOR checklist and reported each item including the research question and the methods for identifying and selecting attributes, and provided the findings in sufficient detail and clarity. CONCLUSIONS Aligning maternal healthcare service provision with women's preferences may foster client-oriented services and thereby improve service uptake and better patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Erku
- Centre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Building G05 2.44A, Gold Coast Campus, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, 4222, Australia. .,Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia. .,Centre for Research and Engagement in Assessment of Health Technology (CREATE), Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
| | - Paul Scuffham
- Centre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Building G05 2.44A, Gold Coast Campus, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, 4222, Australia.,Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia
| | - Katrina Gething
- Centre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Building G05 2.44A, Gold Coast Campus, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, 4222, Australia.,Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia
| | - Richard Norman
- Curtin School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Alemayehu B Mekonnen
- Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Gebremedhin B Gebretekle
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Yibeltal Assefa
- School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Gizachew A Tessema
- Curtin School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.,School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| |
Collapse
|