Cargando…

How to Implement Adherence-Promoting Programs in Clinical Practice? A Discrete Choice Experiment on Physicians’ Preferences

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to examine physicians’ preferences regarding adherence-promoting programs (APPs), and to investigate which APP characteristics influence the willingness of physicians to implement these in daily practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Müller, Sabrina, Ziemssen, Tjalf, Diehm, Curt, Duncker, Tobias, Hoffmanns, Philipp, Thate-Waschke, Inga-Marion, Schürks, Markus, Wilke, Thomas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7028386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32103911
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S222725
_version_ 1783499007043043328
author Müller, Sabrina
Ziemssen, Tjalf
Diehm, Curt
Duncker, Tobias
Hoffmanns, Philipp
Thate-Waschke, Inga-Marion
Schürks, Markus
Wilke, Thomas
author_facet Müller, Sabrina
Ziemssen, Tjalf
Diehm, Curt
Duncker, Tobias
Hoffmanns, Philipp
Thate-Waschke, Inga-Marion
Schürks, Markus
Wilke, Thomas
author_sort Müller, Sabrina
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to examine physicians’ preferences regarding adherence-promoting programs (APPs), and to investigate which APP characteristics influence the willingness of physicians to implement these in daily practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was conducted among general practitioners, cardiologists, neurologists and ophthalmologists in Germany. The design considered five attributes with two or three attribute levels each: validation status of the APP; possibility for physicians to receive a certificate; type of intervention; time commitment per patient and quarter of the year to carry out the APP; reimbursement for APP participation, per included patient and quarter of the year. A multinomial logit model was run to estimate physicians’ utility for each attribute and to evaluate the influence of different levels on the probability of choosing a specific APP. The relative importance of the attributes was compared between different pre-defined subgroups. RESULTS: In total, 222 physicians were included in the analysis. The most important characteristics of APPs were time commitment to carry out the program (34.8% importance), reimbursement (33.3%), and validation status of the program (23.7%). The remaining attributes (type of intervention: 3.6%; possibility to receive a certificate: 4.7%) were proven to be less important for a physician’s decision to participate in an APP. Physicians on average preferred APP alternatives characterized by little time commitment (β=1.456, p<0.001), high reimbursement for work (β=1.392, p<0.001), “positive validation status” (β=0.990, p<0.001), the “possibility to get a certificate” (β=0.197, p<0.001), and the provision of “tools for both physicians and patients” (β=0.150, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: For the majority of the physicians participating in this survey, the willingness to implement an APP is determined by the associated time commitment and reimbursement. Considering physicians' preferences regarding different APP features in the promoting process of these programs may enhance physicians' participation and engagement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7028386
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70283862020-02-26 How to Implement Adherence-Promoting Programs in Clinical Practice? A Discrete Choice Experiment on Physicians’ Preferences Müller, Sabrina Ziemssen, Tjalf Diehm, Curt Duncker, Tobias Hoffmanns, Philipp Thate-Waschke, Inga-Marion Schürks, Markus Wilke, Thomas Patient Prefer Adherence Original Research INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to examine physicians’ preferences regarding adherence-promoting programs (APPs), and to investigate which APP characteristics influence the willingness of physicians to implement these in daily practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was conducted among general practitioners, cardiologists, neurologists and ophthalmologists in Germany. The design considered five attributes with two or three attribute levels each: validation status of the APP; possibility for physicians to receive a certificate; type of intervention; time commitment per patient and quarter of the year to carry out the APP; reimbursement for APP participation, per included patient and quarter of the year. A multinomial logit model was run to estimate physicians’ utility for each attribute and to evaluate the influence of different levels on the probability of choosing a specific APP. The relative importance of the attributes was compared between different pre-defined subgroups. RESULTS: In total, 222 physicians were included in the analysis. The most important characteristics of APPs were time commitment to carry out the program (34.8% importance), reimbursement (33.3%), and validation status of the program (23.7%). The remaining attributes (type of intervention: 3.6%; possibility to receive a certificate: 4.7%) were proven to be less important for a physician’s decision to participate in an APP. Physicians on average preferred APP alternatives characterized by little time commitment (β=1.456, p<0.001), high reimbursement for work (β=1.392, p<0.001), “positive validation status” (β=0.990, p<0.001), the “possibility to get a certificate” (β=0.197, p<0.001), and the provision of “tools for both physicians and patients” (β=0.150, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: For the majority of the physicians participating in this survey, the willingness to implement an APP is determined by the associated time commitment and reimbursement. Considering physicians' preferences regarding different APP features in the promoting process of these programs may enhance physicians' participation and engagement. Dove 2020-02-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7028386/ /pubmed/32103911 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S222725 Text en © 2020 Müller et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Müller, Sabrina
Ziemssen, Tjalf
Diehm, Curt
Duncker, Tobias
Hoffmanns, Philipp
Thate-Waschke, Inga-Marion
Schürks, Markus
Wilke, Thomas
How to Implement Adherence-Promoting Programs in Clinical Practice? A Discrete Choice Experiment on Physicians’ Preferences
title How to Implement Adherence-Promoting Programs in Clinical Practice? A Discrete Choice Experiment on Physicians’ Preferences
title_full How to Implement Adherence-Promoting Programs in Clinical Practice? A Discrete Choice Experiment on Physicians’ Preferences
title_fullStr How to Implement Adherence-Promoting Programs in Clinical Practice? A Discrete Choice Experiment on Physicians’ Preferences
title_full_unstemmed How to Implement Adherence-Promoting Programs in Clinical Practice? A Discrete Choice Experiment on Physicians’ Preferences
title_short How to Implement Adherence-Promoting Programs in Clinical Practice? A Discrete Choice Experiment on Physicians’ Preferences
title_sort how to implement adherence-promoting programs in clinical practice? a discrete choice experiment on physicians’ preferences
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7028386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32103911
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S222725
work_keys_str_mv AT mullersabrina howtoimplementadherencepromotingprogramsinclinicalpracticeadiscretechoiceexperimentonphysicianspreferences
AT ziemssentjalf howtoimplementadherencepromotingprogramsinclinicalpracticeadiscretechoiceexperimentonphysicianspreferences
AT diehmcurt howtoimplementadherencepromotingprogramsinclinicalpracticeadiscretechoiceexperimentonphysicianspreferences
AT dunckertobias howtoimplementadherencepromotingprogramsinclinicalpracticeadiscretechoiceexperimentonphysicianspreferences
AT hoffmannsphilipp howtoimplementadherencepromotingprogramsinclinicalpracticeadiscretechoiceexperimentonphysicianspreferences
AT thatewaschkeingamarion howtoimplementadherencepromotingprogramsinclinicalpracticeadiscretechoiceexperimentonphysicianspreferences
AT schurksmarkus howtoimplementadherencepromotingprogramsinclinicalpracticeadiscretechoiceexperimentonphysicianspreferences
AT wilkethomas howtoimplementadherencepromotingprogramsinclinicalpracticeadiscretechoiceexperimentonphysicianspreferences