Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

Open Access 11-04-2024 | Original Research Article

Consumer Preferences for a Healthcare Appointment Reminder in Australia: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Authors: Shayma Mohammed Selim, Sameera Senanayake, Steven M. McPhail, Hannah E. Carter, Sundresan Naicker, Sanjeewa Kularatna

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

It is essential to consider the evidence of consumer preferences and their specific needs when determining which strategies to use to improve patient attendance at scheduled healthcare appointments.

Objectives

This study aimed to identify key attributes and elicit healthcare consumer preferences for a healthcare appointment reminder system.

Methods

A discrete choice experiment was conducted in a general Australian population sample. The respondents were asked to choose between three options: their preferred reminder (A or B) or a ‘neither’ option. Attributes were developed through a literature review and an expert panel discussion. Reminder options were defined by four attributes: modality, timing, content and interactivity. Multinomial logit and mixed multinomial logit models were estimated to approximate individual preferences for these attributes. A scenario analysis was performed to estimate the likelihood of choosing different reminder systems.

Results

Respondents (n = 361) indicated a significant preference for an appointment reminder to be delivered via a text message (β = 2.42, p < 0.001) less than 3 days before the appointment (β = 0.99, p < 0.001), with basic details including the appointment cost (β = 0.13, p < 0.10), and where there is the ability to cancel or modify the appointment (β = 1.36, p < 0.001). A scenario analysis showed that the likelihood of choosing an appointment reminder system with these characteristics would be 97%.

Conclusions

Our findings provide evidence on how healthcare consumers trade-off between different characteristics of reminder systems, which may be valuable to inform current or future systems. Future studies may focus on exploring the effectiveness of using patient-preferred reminders alongside other mitigation strategies used by providers.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Kheirkhah P, Feng Q, Travis LM, Tavakoli-Tabasi S, Sharafkhaneh A. Prevalence, predictors and economic consequences of no-shows. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;16:13.CrossRef
2.
Nancarrow S, Bradbury J, Avila C. Factors associated with non-attendance in a general practice super clinic population in regional Australia: a retrospective cohort study. Australas Med J. 2014;7:323.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
Bech M. The economics of non-attendance and the expected effect of charging a fine on non-attendees. Health Policy. 2005;74:181–91.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Marbouh D, Khaleel I, Al Shanqiti K, Al Tamimi M, Simsekler MCE, Ellahham S, et al. Evaluating the impact of patient no-shows on service quality. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2020;13:509–17.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
Schwalbe D, Sodemann M, Iachina M, Nørgård BM, Chodkiewicz NH, Ammentorp J, et al. Causes of patient nonattendance at medical appointments: protocol for a mixed methods study. JMIR Res Protoc. 2023;12:e46227.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
6.
Mohammed-Selim S, Kularatna S, Carter H, Bohorquez NG, McPhail SM. Digital health solutions for reducing the impact of non-attendance: a scoping review. Health Policy Technol. 2023;2023:100759.CrossRef
7.
Rubin G, Bate A, George A, Shackley P, Hall N. Preferences for access to the GP: a discrete choice experiment. Br J Gen Pract. 2006;56:743–8.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Crutchfield TM, Kistler CE. Getting patients in the door: medical appointment reminder preferences. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017;2017:141–50.CrossRef
9.
Liu N, Finkelstein SR, Kruk ME, Rosenthal D. When waiting to see a doctor is less irritating: understanding patient preferences and choice behavior in appointment scheduling. Manag Sci. 2018;64:1975–96.CrossRef
10.
Ryan M, Bate A, Eastmond CJ, Ludbrook A. Use of discrete choice experiments to elicit preferences. BMJ Qual Saf. 2001;10:i55-60.CrossRef
11.
Lancsar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user’s guide. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26:661–77.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Clark MD, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D, de Bekker-Grob EW. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32:883–902.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Mandeville KL, Lagarde M, Hanson K. The use of discrete choice experiments to inform health workforce policy: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:1–14.CrossRef
14.
Marshall D, Bridges JF, Hauber B, Cameron R, Donnalley L, Fyie K, Reed Johnson F. Conjoint analysis applications in health: how are studies being designed and reported? An update on current practice in the published literature between 2005 and 2008. Patient. 2010;3:249–56.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Jaeger SR, Rose JM. Stated choice experimentation, contextual influences and food choice: a case study. Food Qual Prefer. 2008;19:539–64.CrossRef
16.
Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser LA, Regier DA, Johnson FR, Mauskopf J. Conjoint analysis applications in health: a checklist. A report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011;14:403–13.PubMedCrossRef
17.
18.
19.
Allen MJ, Doran R, Brain D, Powell EE, O’Beirne J, Valery PC, Barnett A, Hettiarachchi R, Hickman IJ, Kularatna S. A discrete choice experiment to elicit preferences for a liver screening programme in Queensland, Australia: a mixed methods study to select attributes and levels. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23:950.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
Kularatna S, Allen M, Hettiarachchi RM, Crawford-Williams F, Senanayake S, Brain D, Hart NH, Koczwara B, Ee C, Chan RJ. Cancer survivor preferences for models of breast cancer follow-up care: selecting attributes for inclusion in a discrete choice experiment. Patient. 2023;16(4):371–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Brain D, Jadambaa A, Kularatna S. Methodology to derive preference for health screening programmes using discrete choice experiments: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22:1079.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH. Applied choice analysis: a primer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.CrossRef
23.
Scheufele G, Bennett J. Response strategies and learning in discrete choice experiments. Environ Resour Econ. 2012;52:435–53.CrossRef
24.
Determann D, Lambooij MS, Steyerberg EW, de Bekker-Grob EW, De Wit GA. Impact of survey administration mode on the results of a health-related discrete choice experiment: online and paper comparison. Value Health. 2017;20:953–60.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Norman R, Mulhern B, Lancsar E, Lorgelly P, Ratcliffe J, Street D, Viney R. The use of a discrete choice experiment including both duration and dead for the development of an EQ-5D-5L value set for Australia. Pharmacoeconomics. 2023;41:427–38.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
27.
Rose JM, Bliemer MC. Constructing efficient stated choice experimental designs. Transp Rev. 2009;29:587–617.CrossRef
28.
Szinay D, Cameron R, Naughton F, Whitty JA, Brown J, Jones A. Understanding uptake of digital health products: methodology tutorial for a discrete choice experiment using the Bayesian efficient design. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23:e32365.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Ryan M, Gerard K. Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2003;2:55–64.PubMed
30.
Wong SF, Norman R, Dunning TL, Ashley DM, Lorgelly PK. A protocol for a discrete choice experiment: understanding preferences of patients with cancer towards their cancer care across metropolitan and rural regions in Australia. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e006661.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
Campoamor NB, Guerrini CJ, Brooks WB, Bridges JF, Crossnohere NL. Pretesting discrete-choice experiments: a guide for researchers. Patient. 2024;17:109–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Howard K, Salkeld GP, Patel MI, Mann GJ, Pignone MP. Men’s preferences and trade-offs for prostate cancer screening: a discrete choice experiment. Health Expect. 2015;18:3123–35.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Mansfield C, Ekwueme DU, Tangka FK, Brown DS, Smith JL, Guy GP, Li C, Hauber B. Colorectal cancer screening: preferences, past behavior, and future intentions. Patient. 2018;11:599–611.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
34.
Sarikhani Y, Ostovar T, Rossi-Fedele G, Edirippulige S, Bastani P. A protocol for developing a discrete choice experiment to elicit preferences of general practitioners for the choice of specialty. Value Health Reg Issues. 2021;25:80–9.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Hauber AB, González JM, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Prior T, Marshall DA, Cunningham C, IJzerman MJ, Bridges JF. Statistical methods for the analysis of discrete choice experiments: a report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2016;19:300–15.PubMedCrossRef
36.
McFadden D, Train K. Mixed MNL models for discrete response. J Appl Econ. 2000;15:447–70.CrossRef
37.
Greene WH. Nlogit. Stud. Ref. Guide. Zuletzt Geprüft Am. 2012;11:2014.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Finkelstein SR, Liu N, Jani B, Rosenthal D, Poghosyan L. Appointment reminder systems and patient preferences: patient technology usage and familiarity with other service providers as predictive variables. Health Inf J. 2013;19:79–90.CrossRef
42.
Australian Communications and Media Authority. How we use the internet: executive summary and key findings. Commun Media Aust. 2022;2022:56.
43.
44.
45.
Ellis DA, McQueenie R, McConnachie A, Wilson P, Williamson AE. Demographic and practice factors predicting repeated non-attendance in primary care: a national retrospective cohort analysis. Lancet Public Health. 2017;2:e551–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
46.
Boone CE, Celhay P, Gertler P, Gracner T, Rodriguez J. How scheduling systems with automated appointment reminders improve health clinic efficiency. J Health Econ. 2022;82:102598.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Horvath M, Levy J, L'Engle P, Carlson B, Ahmad A, Ferranti J. Impact of health portal enrollment with email reminders on adherence to clinic appointments: a pilot study. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13:e41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
48.
Chung S, Martinez MC, Frosch DL, Jones VG, Chan AS. Patient-centric scheduling with the implementation of health information technology to improve the patient experience and access to care: retrospective case-control analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22:e16451.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Agrawal D, Pang G, Kumara S. Preference based scheduling in a healthcare provider network. Eur J Oper Res. 2023;307:1318–35.CrossRef
50.
Metadata
Title
Consumer Preferences for a Healthcare Appointment Reminder in Australia: A Discrete Choice Experiment
Authors
Shayma Mohammed Selim
Sameera Senanayake
Steven M. McPhail
Hannah E. Carter
Sundresan Naicker
Sanjeewa Kularatna
Publication date
11-04-2024
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-024-00692-9
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Read more

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Pediatric Cardiology Video

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

Cardiopulmonary Comorbidity Video

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Valvular Heart Disease Video

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Watch now

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits