The Elicitation of Patient Preferences for Hip Replacement Surgery: a Discrete Choice Experiment

Overview

Journal BMC Health Serv Res

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Health Services

Date 2025 Feb 19

PMID 39966922

Authors

Stefan Rohrbacher

Martin Emmert

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The calculation of aggregated composite measures is a widely used approach to reduce the amount of quality-related data on hospital report cards (HRCs). This study aims to elicit patient preferences for hospital choice concerning publicly available hospital quality information for total hip replacement surgery. The results may assist in the development of weighted composite measures for elective hip replacement, which facilitates a conscious selection of the hospital.

Methods: We collect primary survey data on a sample of 364 randomly selected users of the German HRC "Weisse Liste" (WL) (4/5 2023). The key attributes for hospital choice are based on the information provided in WL. We run various model specifications to identify patient preferences, allowing the analysis of unobserved preference heterogeneity.

Results: Our sample consists of 177 respondents (mean age 56.46; 43.5% female). All attributes used are statistically significant for hospital choice ( ). Patients consider the "Quality of treatment" (26.95%; level range 1.734) and "Number of cases treated" (24.78%; level range 1.594) to be the most important. In contrast, "EndoCert Certificate" (17.50%; level range 1.126), "Equipment and qualification" (15.83%; level range 1.018), and "Recommendation from other patients" (14.94%; level range 0.960) remain less important. We find no evidence for unobserved heterogeneity regarding the preferences for hospital choice.

Conclusion: Based on our findings, HRC users value publicly available hospital quality information for elective hip replacement differently. These differences should be taken into account when calculating aggregated composite measures. Our results may allow the calculation of a weighted aggregate composite measure from the perspective of HRC users.

References

Nimptsch U, Mansky T . Hospital volume and mortality for 25 types of inpatient treatment in German hospitals: observational study using complete national data from 2009 to 2014. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(9):e016184. PMC: 5589035. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016184. View

Shaw C, Groene O, Botje D, Sunol R, Kutryba B, Klazinga N . The effect of certification and accreditation on quality management in 4 clinical services in 73 European hospitals. Int J Qual Health Care. 2014; 26 Suppl 1:100-7. PMC: 4001697. DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzu023. View

Huckman R, Kelley M . Public reporting, consumerism, and patient empowerment. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369(20):1875-7. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1310419. View

Lancsar E, Louviere J . Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008; 26(8):661-77. DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004. View

Schafer T, Pritzkuleit R, Jeszenszky C, Malzahn J, Maier W, Gunther K . Trends and geographical variation of primary hip and knee joint replacement in Germany. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012; 21(2):279-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2012.11.006. View

Muhlbacher A, Bethge S . What matters in type 2 diabetes mellitus oral treatment? A discrete choice experiment to evaluate patient preferences. Eur J Health Econ. 2015; 17(9):1125-1140. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-015-0750-5. View

Makela K, Hakkinen U, Peltola M, Linna M, Kroger H, Remes V . The effect of hospital volume on length of stay, re-admissions, and complications of total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2010; 82(1):20-6. PMC: 3229993. DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2010.533930. View

Jeschke E, Gehrke T, Gunster C, Heller K, Leicht H, Malzahn J . Low Hospital Volume Increases Revision Rate and Mortality Following Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 17,773 Cases. J Arthroplasty. 2019; 34(9):2045-2050. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.05.005. View

Emmert M, Rohrbacher S, Jahn J, Fernando K, Lauerer M . Preferences of People Living with HIV for Long-Acting Antiretroviral Treatment in Germany: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment. Patient. 2023; 16(5):537-553. PMC: 10409836. DOI: 10.1007/s40271-023-00641-y. View

10.

Kuklinski D, Vogel J, Geissler A . The impact of quality on hospital choice. Which information affects patients' behavior for colorectal resection or knee replacement?. Health Care Manag Sci. 2021; 24(1):185-202. PMC: 8184721. DOI: 10.1007/s10729-020-09540-2. View

11.

Hauber A, Gonzalez J, Groothuis-Oudshoorn C, Prior T, Marshall D, Cunningham C . Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: A Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2016; 19(4):300-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.004. View

12.

Osmanski-Zenk K, Klinder A, Pingsmann A, Lohmann C, Bail H, Kladny B . Institutional Surgical Setting and Volume Effects of Certified Arthroplasty Centers in Germany: Evaluation of the Quality of Care in a 5-Year Comparison. Healthcare (Basel). 2024; 12(9). PMC: 11083652. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12090904. View

13.

Metcalfe D, Rios Diaz A, Olufajo O, Massa M, Ketelaar N, Flottorp S . Impact of public release of performance data on the behaviour of healthcare consumers and providers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 9:CD004538. PMC: 6513271. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004538.pub3. View

14.

Damman O, Spreeuwenberg P, Rademakers J, Hendriks M . Creating compact comparative health care information: what are the key quality attributes to present for cataract and total hip or knee replacement surgery?. Med Decis Making. 2011; 32(2):287-300. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X11415115. View

15.

Bergschmidt P, Maruniewicz J, Westphal T, Klinder A, Mittelmeier W . Retrospective Comparative Study of the Influence on Quality of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty by the EndoCert-Certification System in a Communal Hospital. Z Orthop Unfall. 2020; 159(4):397-405. DOI: 10.1055/a-1107-3398. View

16.

Bridges J, Hauber A, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser L, Regier D . Conjoint analysis applications in health--a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011; 14(4):403-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013. View

17.

Muhlbacher A, Sadler A, Dippel F, Juhnke C . Treatment Preferences in Germany Differ Among Apheresis Patients with Severe Hypercholesterolemia. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018; 36(4):477-493. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0614-9. View

18.

Simon A . [Patient involvement and information preferences on hospital quality: results of an empirical analysis]. Unfallchirurg. 2010; 114(1):73-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00113-010-1882-9. View

19.

Muhlbacher A, Bethge S . Patients' preferences: a discrete-choice experiment for treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Health Econ. 2014; 16(6):657-70. PMC: 4464047. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-014-0622-4. View

20.

Smith M, Bednarz L, Nordby P, Fink J, Greenlee R, Bolt D . Increasing Consumer Engagement by Tailoring a Public Reporting Website on the Quality of Diabetes Care: A Qualitative Study. J Med Internet Res. 2016; 18(12):e332. PMC: 5214669. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6555. View