Key Factors Relevant for Healthcare Decisions of Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Secondary Care According to Healthcare Professionals

Ruissen, Merel M; Sont, Jacob K.; Vugt, Heidi A. van; Kunneman, Marleen; Rutten, Guy E.H.M.; Koning, Eelco J.P. de

doi:10.2147/ppa.s354686

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A study by Ruissen et al found that healthcare providers also recognize the importance of discussing person-related factors in the diabetes treatment decision-making process. 29 Patient’s preferences and quality of life were reported as key factors relevant for diabetes treatment decisions according to secondary care healthcare providers. Therefore, not only the biological effects of a treatment needs to be discussed (which is standard) during the decision-making process, but also the impact of a treatment on a patient’s quality of life.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preferred Conversation Topics with Respect to Treatment Decisions Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes

Tichler¹,

Hertroijs²,

Ruwaard³

et al. 2023

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Greater knowledge of individuals’ needs and preferences can enhance shared decision-making, which is associated with improved quality of decisions and increased satisfaction. This study aimed to identify and prioritize the attributes (ie conversation topics) that individuals with type 2 diabetes find it most important to discuss with their healthcare provider regarding treatment decisions. Patients and Methods First, small group interviews were organized with adults with type 2 diabetes (N=8) treated in primary care to identify the attributes that they find important to discuss regarding treatment decisions. A five-step nominal group technique was applied during the interviews. An object best-worst scaling (BWS) survey was subsequently distributed to individuals with self-reported diabetes participating in the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel of the Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (N=600) to determine the relative importance score (RIS) of the identified attributes. A higher RIS indicates a higher level of perceived importance. Subgroup and latent class analyses were performed to explore whether individuals’ demographic and disease characteristics influenced their attribute preferences. Results A total of 21 attributes were identified during three small group interviews with individuals with type 2 diabetes. Respondents in the BWS survey (N=285) viewed “quality of life” (RIS=11.97), “clinical outcomes” (RIS=10.40), “long-term diabetes complications” (RIS=9.83) and “short-term adverse medication” (RIS=7.72) as the most important in the decision-making process for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Some differences in attribute preferences were identified according to demographic and disease characteristics. Conclusion In general, individuals with type 2 diabetes not only want to discuss the biological effects of treatments, but also the impact of treatment on their quality of life. Healthcare providers should be aware that attributes are viewed differently by different individuals. This emphasizes the need for tailor-made healthcare decisions, which means eliciting and responding to individual preferences in the decision-making process.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preferred Conversation Topics with Respect to Treatment Decisions Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes

Tichler¹,

Hertroijs²,

Ruwaard³

et al. 2023

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We can't process all available information perfectly, and so we often rely on heuristics (mental shortcuts) or satisfice (make reasonable choices based on limited information) instead of aiming for the absolute optimal choice. In healthcare, this might explain why patients might choose a convenient (but potentially less effective) treatment option over a more complex but potentially more beneficial one (Ruissen et al, 2022). • Psychological Biases: BE highlights how systematic biases in our thinking can influence healthcare decisions.…”

Section: Unveiling the Labyrinth Of Healthcare Choices: A Psychoecono...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing Psychoeconomics of Healthcare Decisions: Understanding the Why behind Our Choices

Cati

2024

PSYCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We introduce Psychoeconomics of Healthcare Decisions, a novel interdisciplinary field that sheds light on the "why" behind our medical choices. This field explores the intricate web of psychological factors, economic considerations, and individual behaviors that influence healthcare decision-making. By examining the impact of cultural contexts and socio-economic environments, Psychoeconomics of Healthcare Decisions offers a deeper understanding of patient choices. This knowledge has the potential to revolutionize healthcare delivery by empowering patients, informing policy decisions, and ultimately promoting preventive care utilization and treatment adherence. This manuscript lays the groundwork for this nascent field, outlining its potential to improve public health outcomes.

show abstract

“… 28 As such, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), a university teaching hospital in the Netherlands, has adopted a structured consultation model in diabetes care. 29 This model focuses on both patients’ life- and health-related factors, e.g., social context, which may involve financial hardship. It is standard practice to consider travel time and out-of-pocket costs in the patient-clinician interaction, especially since LUMC is a referral center for patients with rare types of diabetes, e.g., monogenic diabetes mellitus.…”

Section: Shared Decision-making Between Patient and Clinician: Discus...mentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Use Costs in Value-Based Healthcare: Learning from Real-life Examples

van der Poort,

Kidanemariam,

Moriates

et al. 2023

J GEN INTERN MED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Healthcare organizations measure costs for business operations but do not routinely incorporate costs in decision-making on the value of care. Aim Provide guidance on how to use costs in value-based healthcare (VBHC) delivery at different levels of the healthcare system. Setting and Participants Integrated practice units (IPUs) for diabetes mellitus (DM) and for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) at the Leiden University Medical Center and a collaboration of seven breast cancer IPUs of the Santeon group, all in the Netherlands. Program Description and Evaluation VBHC aims to optimize care delivery to the patient by understanding how costs relate to outcomes. At the level of shared decision-making between patient and clinician, yearly check-up consultations for DM type I were analyzed for patient-relevant costs. In benchmarking among providers, quantities of cost drivers for breast cancer care were assessed in scorecards. In continuous learning, cost-effectiveness analysis was compared with radar chart analysis to assess the value of telemonitoring in outpatient follow-up. Discussion Costs vary among providers in healthcare, but also between provider and patient. The joint analysis of outcomes and costs using appropriate methods helps identify and optimize the aspects of care that drive desired outcomes and value.

show abstract

Key Factors Relevant for Healthcare Decisions of Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Secondary Care According to Healthcare Professionals

Cited by 3 publications

References 24 publications

Preferred Conversation Topics with Respect to Treatment Decisions Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes

Preferred Conversation Topics with Respect to Treatment Decisions Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes

Introducing Psychoeconomics of Healthcare Decisions: Understanding the Why behind Our Choices

How to Use Costs in Value-Based Healthcare: Learning from Real-life Examples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About