Patients' and Psychologists' Preferences for Feedback Reports on Expected Mental Health Treatment Outcomes: A Discrete-Choice Experiment

被引:2
|
作者
Hilhorst, Loes [1 ]
van der Stappen, Jip [1 ]
Lokkerbol, Joran [2 ]
Hiligsmann, Mickael [3 ]
Risseeuw, Anna H. [4 ]
Tiemens, Bea G. [1 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Behav Sci Inst, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Netherlands Inst Mental Hlth, Trimbos Inst, Ctr Econ Evaluat, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Maastricht Univ, CAPHRI Care & Publ Hlth Res Inst, Dept Hlth Serv Res, Maastricht, Netherlands
[4] MIND Ypsilon, Amersfoort, Netherlands
[5] Pro Persona Res, Renkum, Netherlands
关键词
Routine outcome monitoring; Expected treatment outcome; Patient preference; Psychologist preference; Discrete choice experiment; Choice; CLINICAL SUPPORT TOOLS; PSYCHOTHERAPY; THERAPIST; PROGRESS; CLIENTS;
D O I
10.1007/s10488-022-01194-2
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
In recent years, there has been an increasing focus on routine outcome monitoring (ROM) to provide feedback on patient progress during mental health treatment, with some systems also predicting the expected treatment outcome. The aim of this study was to elicit patients' and psychologists' preferences regarding how ROM system-generated feedback reports should display predicted treatment outcomes. In a discrete-choice experiment, participants were asked 12-13 times to choose between two ways of displaying an expected treatment outcome. The choices varied in four different attributes: representation, outcome, predictors, and advice. A conditional logistic regression was used to estimate participants' preferences. A total of 104 participants (68 patients and 36 psychologists) completed the questionnaire. Participants preferred feedback reports on expected treatment outcome that included: (a) both text and images, (b) a continuous outcome or an outcome that is expressed in terms of a probability, (c) specific predictors, and (d) specific advice. For both patients and psychologists, specific predictors appeared to be most important, specific advice was second most important, a continuous outcome or a probability was third most important, and feedback that includes both text and images was fourth in importance. The ranking in importance of both the attributes and the attribute levels was identical for patients and psychologists. This suggests that, as long as the report is understandable to the patient, psychologists and patients can use the same ROM feedback report, eliminating the need for ROM administrators to develop different versions.
引用
收藏
页码:707 / 721
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Patients’ and Psychologists’ Preferences for Feedback Reports on Expected Mental Health Treatment Outcomes: A Discrete-Choice Experiment
    Loes Hilhorst
    Jip van der Stappen
    Joran Lokkerbol
    Mickaël Hiligsmann
    Anna H. Risseeuw
    Bea G. Tiemens
    Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 2022, 49 : 707 - 721
  • [2] A discrete-choice experiment to assess treatment modality preferences of patients with depression
    Lokkerbol, Joran
    Geomini, Amber
    van Voorthuijsen, Jule
    van Straten, Annemieke
    Tiemens, Bea
    Smit, Filip
    Risseeuw, Anneriek
    Hiligsmann, Mickael
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS, 2019, 22 (02) : 178 - 186
  • [3] A discrete-choice experiment to assess treatment modality preferences of patients with anxiety disorder
    Lokkerbol, Joran
    van Voorthuijsen, Julia M.
    Geomini, Amber
    Tiemens, Bea
    van Straten, Annemieke
    Smit, Filip
    Risseeuw, Anneriek
    van Balkom, Anton
    Hiligsmann, Mickael
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS, 2019, 22 (02) : 169 - 177
  • [4] Chronic pain patients’ treatment preferences: a discrete-choice experiment
    Axel C. Mühlbacher
    Uwe Junker
    Christin Juhnke
    Edgar Stemmler
    Thomas Kohlmann
    Friedhelm Leverkus
    Matthias Nübling
    The European Journal of Health Economics, 2015, 16 : 613 - 628
  • [5] Chronic pain patients' treatment preferences: a discrete-choice experiment
    Muehlbacher, Axel C.
    Junker, Uwe
    Juhnke, Christin
    Stemmler, Edgar
    Kohlmann, Thomas
    Leverkus, Friedhelm
    Nuebling, Matthias
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2015, 16 (06) : 613 - 628
  • [6] Patients’ preferences for osteoporosis drug treatment: a discrete-choice experiment
    Mickaël Hiligsmann
    Benedict G Dellaert
    Carmen D Dirksen
    Trudy van der Weijden
    Stefan Goemaere
    Jean-Yves Reginster
    Verity Watson
    Annelies Boonen
    Arthritis Research & Therapy, 16
  • [7] Treatment preferences of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: a discrete-choice experiment
    Hazlewood, Glen S.
    Bombardier, Claire
    Tomlinson, George
    Thorne, Carter
    Bykerk, Vivian P.
    Thompson, Andrew
    Tin, Diane
    Marshall, Deborah A.
    RHEUMATOLOGY, 2016, 55 (11) : 1959 - 1968
  • [8] Patient preferences for treatment in steroid resistant ulcerative colitis - a discrete-choice experiment
    Wickramasekera, Nyantara
    Coates, Elizabeth
    Barr, Amy
    Lee, Matthew J.
    Blackwell, Sue
    Bedford, Hugh
    Dames, Nicola
    Sebastian, Shaji
    Probert, Christopher
    Shackley, Phil
    Lobo, Alan J.
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2022, 57 (07) : 797 - 806
  • [9] A discrete-choice experiment to assess patients' preferences for osteoarthritis treatment: An ESCEO working group
    Hiligsmann, Mickael
    Dennison, Elaine
    Beaudart, Charlotte
    Herrero-Beaumont, Gabriel
    Branco, Jaime
    Bruyere, Olivier
    Conaghan, Philip G.
    Cooper, Cyrus
    Al-Daghri, Nasser
    Jiwa, Famida
    Lems, Willem
    Pinto, Daniel
    Rizzoli, Rene
    Thomas, Thierry
    Uebelhart, Daniel
    Veronese, Nicolas
    Reginster, Jean-Yves
    SEMINARS IN ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 2020, 50 (05) : 859 - 866
  • [10] Attributes for a discrete-choice experiment on preferences of patients for oncology pharmacy consultations
    Damerval, Margaux
    Bennani, Mohammed
    Rioufol, Catherine
    Omrani, Selim
    Riboulet, Margaux
    Etienne-Selloum, Nelly
    Saint-Ghislain, Audrey
    Leenhardt, Fanny
    Schmitt, Antonin
    Simon, Nicolas
    Clairet, Anne-Laure
    Meurisse, Aurelia
    Nerich, Virginie
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2024, 32 (05)