OBJECTIVE To assess the impact of quality of care and other hospital information on patients' choices between hospitals. METHODS 665 former surgical patients were invited to respond to an Internet... Show moreOBJECTIVE To assess the impact of quality of care and other hospital information on patients' choices between hospitals. METHODS 665 former surgical patients were invited to respond to an Internet-based questionnaire including a choice-based conjoint analysis. Each patient was presented with 12 different comparisons of 2 hospitals, with each hospital characterized by 6 attributes containing 2 levels. Hospital attributes were included if frequently reported by patients as most important for future hospital choices. These included both general hospital information (e.g., atmosphere), information on quality of care (e.g., percentage of patients with "textbook outcome"), and surgery-specific information (e.g., possibility for minimally invasive procedure). Hierarchial Bayes estimation was used to estimate the utilities for each attribute level for each patient. Based on the ranges of these utilities, the relative importance of each hospital attribute was determined for each participant as a measure of the impact on patients' choices. RESULTS 308 (46.3%) questionnaires were available for analysis. Of the hospital attributes that patients considered, surgery-specific information on average had the highest relative importance (25.7 [23.9-27.5]), regardless of gender, age, and education. Waiting time and hospital atmosphere were considered least important. The attribute concerning the percentage of patients with "textbook outcomes" had the second greatest impact (18.3 [16.9-19.6]), which was similar for patients with different adverse outcome experience. CONCLUSIONS Surgery-specific and quality of care information are more important than general information when patients choose between hospitals. Show less
Marang-van de Mheen, P.J.; Dijs-Elsinga, J.; Otten, W.; Versluijs, M.; Smeets, H.J.; Made, W.J. van der; ... ; Kievit, J. 2010
OBJECTIVE To assess whether patients who experience adverse outcomes during hospitalisation or after discharge differ in the information they would use for future choices of a hospital for surgery... Show moreOBJECTIVE To assess whether patients who experience adverse outcomes during hospitalisation or after discharge differ in the information they would use for future choices of a hospital for surgery compared with patients without any adverse outcomes. DESIGN Cross-sectional questionnaire study, including questions on (1) adverse outcome occurrence during hospitalisation and after discharge, (2) information patients would use for future hospital choice and (3) priority of information. SETTING Three hospitals in the western part of The Netherlands. STUDY SAMPLE All 2122 patients who underwent elective aorta reconstruction (for treatment of aneurysm), cholecystectomy, colon resection, inguinal hernia repair, oesophageal resection or thyroid surgery in the period 2005-2006, of whom 1329 (62.6%) responded. RESULTS Patients who experienced postdischarge adverse outcomes intend to use more information items to choose a future hospital (on average 1.6 items more). They more often would use the item on information provision during hospitalisation (OR 2.35 (1.37 to 4.03)) and information on various quality-of-care measures, compared with patients without adverse outcomes. Patients who experienced in-hospital adverse outcomes would not use more information items but more often would use the item on mortality after surgery (OR 1.93 (1.27 to 2.94)) and extended hospital stay (OR 1.61 (1.10 to 2.36)). However, when asked for priority of information, previous treatment in that hospital is mentioned as the most important item by most patients (32%), regardless of adverse outcome occurrence, followed by hospital reputation and waiting time. CONCLUSIONS Adverse outcome experience may change the information patients use (on quality of care) to choose a future hospital. Show less
Marang-van de Mheen, P.J.; Dijs-Elsinga, J.; Otten, W.; Versluijs, M.; Smeets, H.J.; Vree, R.; ... ; Kievit, J. 2010
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of quality of care and other hospital information on patients' choices between hospitals. METHODS: 665 former surgical patients were invited to respond to an... Show moreOBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of quality of care and other hospital information on patients' choices between hospitals. METHODS: 665 former surgical patients were invited to respond to an Internet-based questionnaire including a choice-based conjoint analysis. Each patient was presented with 12 different comparisons of 2 hospitals, with each hospital characterized by 6 attributes containing 2 levels. Hospital attributes were included if frequently reported by patients as most important for future hospital choices. These included both general hospital information (e.g., atmosphere), information on quality of care (e.g., percentage of patients with "textbook outcome"), and surgery-specific information (e.g., possibility for minimally invasive procedure). Hierarchial Bayes estimation was used to estimate the utilities for each attribute level for each patient. Based on the ranges of these utilities, the relative importance of each hospital attribute was determined for each participant as a measure of the impact on patients' choices. RESULTS: 308 (46.3%) questionnaires were available for analysis. Of the hospital attributes that patients considered, surgery-specific information on average had the highest relative importance (25.7 [23.9-27.5]), regardless of gender, age, and education. Waiting time and hospital atmosphere were considered least important. The attribute concerning the percentage of patients with "textbook outcomes" had the second greatest impact (18.3 [16.9-19.6]), which was similar for patients with different adverse outcome experience. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery-specific and quality of care information are more important than general information when patients choose between hospitals. Show less
Objective. To assess whether patients use information on quality of care when choosing a hospital for surgery compared with more general hospital information. Methods. In this cross-sectional study... Show moreObjective. To assess whether patients use information on quality of care when choosing a hospital for surgery compared with more general hospital information. Methods. In this cross-sectional study in 3 Dutch hospitals, questionnaires were sent to 2122 patients who underwent 1 of 6 elective surgical procedures in 2005-2006 (aorta reconstruction [for treatment of aneurysm], cholecystectomy, colon resection, inguinal hernia repair, esophageal resection, thyroid surgery). Patients were asked which information they had used to choose this hospital and which information they intended to use if they would need similar surgical treatment in the future. Results. In total, 1329 questionnaires were available for analysis (response rate 62.6%). Most patients indicated having used the hospital's good reputation (69.1%) and friendly hospital atmosphere (63.3%) to choose a hospital. For future choices, most patients intended to use the fact that they were already treated in that hospital (79.3%) and the hospital's good reputation (74.1%). Regarding quality-of-care information, patients preferred a summary measure (% patients with ''textbook outcome'') over separate more detailed measures (52.1% v. 38.0%, chi 2 = 291, P < 0.01). For future choices, patients intend to use more information items than in 2005-2006, both in absolute terms (9 v. 4 items, t = 38.3, P < 0.01) as relative to the total number of available items (41.3% [40.1%-42.5%] v. 29.2% [28.1%-30.2%]). Conclusion. Patients intended to use more information for future choices than they used for past choices. For future choices, most patients prefer a summary measure on quality of care over more detailed measures but seem to value that they were already treated in that hospital or a hospital's good reputation even more. Show less
