Understanding and using comparative healthcare information; the effect of the amount of information and consumer characteristics and skills
- PMID: 22958295
- PMCID: PMC3483238
- DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-12-101
Understanding and using comparative healthcare information; the effect of the amount of information and consumer characteristics and skills
Abstract
Background: Consumers are increasingly exposed to comparative healthcare information (information about the quality of different healthcare providers). Partly because of its complexity, the use of this information has been limited. The objective of this study was to examine how the amount of presented information influences the comprehension and use of comparative healthcare information when important consumer characteristics and skills are taken into account.
Methods: In this randomized controlled experiment, comparative information on total hip or knee surgery was used as a test case. An online survey was distributed among 800 members of the NIVEL Insurants Panel and 76 hip- or knee surgery patients. Participants were assigned to one of four subgroups, who were shown 3, 7, 11 or 15 quality aspects of three hospitals. We conducted Kruskall-Wallis tests, Chi-square tests and hierarchical multiple linear regression analyses to examine relationships between the amount of information and consumer characteristics and skills (literacy, numeracy, active choice behaviour) on one hand, and outcome measures related to effectively using information (comprehension, perceived usefulness of information, hospital choice, ease of making a choice) on the other hand.
Results: 414 people (47%) participated. Regression analysis showed that the amount of information slightly influenced the comprehension and the perceived usefulness of comparative healthcare information. It did not affect consumers' hospital choice and ease of making this choice. Consumer characteristics (especially age) and skills (especially literacy) were the most important factors affecting the comprehension of information and the ease of making a hospital choice. For the perceived usefulness of comparative information, active choice behaviour was the most influencing factor.
Conclusion: The effects of the amount of information were not unambiguous. It remains unclear what the ideal amount of quality information to be presented would be. Reducing the amount of information will probably not automatically result in more effective use of comparative healthcare information by consumers. More important, consumer characteristics and skills appeared to be more influential factors contributing to information comprehension and use. Consequently, we would suggest that more emphasis on improving consumers' skills is needed to enhance the use of comparative healthcare information.
Similar articles
-
Making comparative performance information more comprehensible: an experimental evaluation of the impact of formats on consumer understanding.BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Nov;25(11):860-869. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004120. Epub 2015 Nov 5. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016. PMID: 26543066 Free PMC article.
-
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. 2012 Mar-Apr;32(2):287-300. doi: 10.1177/0272989X11415115. Epub 2011 Aug 15. Med Decis Making. 2012. PMID: 21844381
-
Consumer competencies and the use of comparative quality information: it isn't just about literacy.Med Care Res Rev. 2007 Aug;64(4):379-94. doi: 10.1177/1077558707301630. Med Care Res Rev. 2007. PMID: 17684108
-
Fulfilment of knowledge expectations among family members of patients undergoing arthroplasty: a European perspective.Scand J Caring Sci. 2015 Dec;29(4):615-24. doi: 10.1111/scs.12199. Epub 2015 Feb 4. Scand J Caring Sci. 2015. PMID: 25648518 Review.
-
Customization options in consumer health information materials on type-2 diabetes mellitus-an analysis of modifiable features in different types of media.Front Public Health. 2024 Feb 21;12:1252244. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1252244. eCollection 2024. Front Public Health. 2024. PMID: 38450136 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Healthcare professionals' views on feedback of a patient safety culture assessment.BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Jun 17;16:199. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1404-8. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016. PMID: 27316921 Free PMC article.
-
Patients' perspectives of care and surgical outcomes in Michigan: an analysis using the CAHPS hospital survey.Ann Surg. 2014 Jul;260(1):5-9. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000626. Ann Surg. 2014. PMID: 24646549 Free PMC article.
-
Making comparative performance information more comprehensible: an experimental evaluation of the impact of formats on consumer understanding.BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Nov;25(11):860-869. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004120. Epub 2015 Nov 5. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016. PMID: 26543066 Free PMC article.
-
Comparative Quality Indicators for Hospital Choice: Do General Practitioners Care?PLoS One. 2016 Feb 3;11(2):e0147296. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147296. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 26840429 Free PMC article.
-
Testing the effects on information use by older versus younger women of modality and narration style in a hospital report card.Health Expect. 2022 Apr;25(2):567-578. doi: 10.1111/hex.13389. Epub 2021 Dec 24. Health Expect. 2022. PMID: 34953006 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Rothberg MB, Benjamin EM, Lindenauer PK. Public reporting of hospital quality: recommendations to benefit patients and hospitals. J Hosp Med. 2009;4:541–545. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical