Applying Best-Worst scaling methodology to establish delivery preferences of a symptom supportive care intervention in patients with lung cancer

Alex Molassiotis, Richard Emsley, Darren Ashcroft, Ann Caress, Jackie Ellis, Richard Wagland, Chris D. Bailey, Jemma Haines, Mari Lloyd Williams, Paul Lorigan, Jaclyn Smith, Carol Tishelman, Fiona Blackhall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Delivering a non-pharmacological symptom management intervention in patients with lung cancer is often challenging due to difficulties with recruitment, high attrition rates, high symptom burden, and other methodological problems. The aim of the present study was to elicit quantitative estimates of utility (benefit) associated with different attribute levels (delivery options) of a symptom management intervention in lung cancer patients. Methods: An application of Best-Worst scaling methodology was used. Effects (attributes) tested included the location of the intervention (home or hospital), type of trainer (health professional or trained volunteer), caregiver involvement or not, and intervention delivered individually or in groups of patients. Participants were asked to evaluate and compare their preferences (utilities) towards the different attribute levels within scenarios and select the pair of attribute levels that they consider to be furthest apart. Results: Eighty-seven patients with lung cancer participated. The most important preferences for an intervention included the location (being delivered at home) and delivered by a health care professional. The least important preference was the involvement of a caregiver. Gender had an effect on preferences, with females being less inclined than men to prefer to receive an intervention in the home than the hospital and less inclined than men to have no other patients present. Furthermore, older participants and those in advanced stages of their disease were less inclined to have no other patients present compared to younger participants and those with earlier stages of disease, respectively. Conclusion: Considering patient preferences is an important step in developing feasible, patient-centred, appropriate and methodologically rigorous interventions and this study provided indications of such patient preferences.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)199-204
Number of pages6
JournalLung Cancer
Volume77
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Lung Neoplasms
Patient Preference
Caregivers
Volunteers
Delivery of Health Care
Health

Cite this

Molassiotis, Alex ; Emsley, Richard ; Ashcroft, Darren ; Caress, Ann ; Ellis, Jackie ; Wagland, Richard ; Bailey, Chris D. ; Haines, Jemma ; Williams, Mari Lloyd ; Lorigan, Paul ; Smith, Jaclyn ; Tishelman, Carol ; Blackhall, Fiona. / Applying Best-Worst scaling methodology to establish delivery preferences of a symptom supportive care intervention in patients with lung cancer. In: Lung Cancer. 2012 ; Vol. 77, No. 1. pp. 199-204.
@article{8a14f3dcc04042f8b2f4e7cba13b888e,
title = "Applying Best-Worst scaling methodology to establish delivery preferences of a symptom supportive care intervention in patients with lung cancer",
abstract = "Background: Delivering a non-pharmacological symptom management intervention in patients with lung cancer is often challenging due to difficulties with recruitment, high attrition rates, high symptom burden, and other methodological problems. The aim of the present study was to elicit quantitative estimates of utility (benefit) associated with different attribute levels (delivery options) of a symptom management intervention in lung cancer patients. Methods: An application of Best-Worst scaling methodology was used. Effects (attributes) tested included the location of the intervention (home or hospital), type of trainer (health professional or trained volunteer), caregiver involvement or not, and intervention delivered individually or in groups of patients. Participants were asked to evaluate and compare their preferences (utilities) towards the different attribute levels within scenarios and select the pair of attribute levels that they consider to be furthest apart. Results: Eighty-seven patients with lung cancer participated. The most important preferences for an intervention included the location (being delivered at home) and delivered by a health care professional. The least important preference was the involvement of a caregiver. Gender had an effect on preferences, with females being less inclined than men to prefer to receive an intervention in the home than the hospital and less inclined than men to have no other patients present. Furthermore, older participants and those in advanced stages of their disease were less inclined to have no other patients present compared to younger participants and those with earlier stages of disease, respectively. Conclusion: Considering patient preferences is an important step in developing feasible, patient-centred, appropriate and methodologically rigorous interventions and this study provided indications of such patient preferences.",
keywords = "Best Worst scaling, Discrete Choices Experiment, Intervention, Lung cancer, Preferences, Symptom management",
author = "Alex Molassiotis and Richard Emsley and Darren Ashcroft and Ann Caress and Jackie Ellis and Richard Wagland and Bailey, {Chris D.} and Jemma Haines and Williams, {Mari Lloyd} and Paul Lorigan and Jaclyn Smith and Carol Tishelman and Fiona Blackhall",
year = "2012",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.02.001",
language = "English",
volume = "77",
pages = "199--204",
journal = "Lung Cancer",
issn = "0169-5002",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "1",

}

Molassiotis, A, Emsley, R, Ashcroft, D, Caress, A, Ellis, J, Wagland, R, Bailey, CD, Haines, J, Williams, ML, Lorigan, P, Smith, J, Tishelman, C & Blackhall, F 2012, 'Applying Best-Worst scaling methodology to establish delivery preferences of a symptom supportive care intervention in patients with lung cancer', Lung Cancer, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 199-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.02.001

Applying Best-Worst scaling methodology to establish delivery preferences of a symptom supportive care intervention in patients with lung cancer. / Molassiotis, Alex; Emsley, Richard; Ashcroft, Darren; Caress, Ann; Ellis, Jackie; Wagland, Richard; Bailey, Chris D.; Haines, Jemma; Williams, Mari Lloyd; Lorigan, Paul; Smith, Jaclyn; Tishelman, Carol; Blackhall, Fiona.

In: Lung Cancer, Vol. 77, No. 1, 01.07.2012, p. 199-204.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Applying Best-Worst scaling methodology to establish delivery preferences of a symptom supportive care intervention in patients with lung cancer

AU - Molassiotis, Alex

AU - Emsley, Richard

AU - Ashcroft, Darren

AU - Caress, Ann

AU - Ellis, Jackie

AU - Wagland, Richard

AU - Bailey, Chris D.

AU - Haines, Jemma

AU - Williams, Mari Lloyd

AU - Lorigan, Paul

AU - Smith, Jaclyn

AU - Tishelman, Carol

AU - Blackhall, Fiona

PY - 2012/7/1

Y1 - 2012/7/1

N2 - Background: Delivering a non-pharmacological symptom management intervention in patients with lung cancer is often challenging due to difficulties with recruitment, high attrition rates, high symptom burden, and other methodological problems. The aim of the present study was to elicit quantitative estimates of utility (benefit) associated with different attribute levels (delivery options) of a symptom management intervention in lung cancer patients. Methods: An application of Best-Worst scaling methodology was used. Effects (attributes) tested included the location of the intervention (home or hospital), type of trainer (health professional or trained volunteer), caregiver involvement or not, and intervention delivered individually or in groups of patients. Participants were asked to evaluate and compare their preferences (utilities) towards the different attribute levels within scenarios and select the pair of attribute levels that they consider to be furthest apart. Results: Eighty-seven patients with lung cancer participated. The most important preferences for an intervention included the location (being delivered at home) and delivered by a health care professional. The least important preference was the involvement of a caregiver. Gender had an effect on preferences, with females being less inclined than men to prefer to receive an intervention in the home than the hospital and less inclined than men to have no other patients present. Furthermore, older participants and those in advanced stages of their disease were less inclined to have no other patients present compared to younger participants and those with earlier stages of disease, respectively. Conclusion: Considering patient preferences is an important step in developing feasible, patient-centred, appropriate and methodologically rigorous interventions and this study provided indications of such patient preferences.

AB - Background: Delivering a non-pharmacological symptom management intervention in patients with lung cancer is often challenging due to difficulties with recruitment, high attrition rates, high symptom burden, and other methodological problems. The aim of the present study was to elicit quantitative estimates of utility (benefit) associated with different attribute levels (delivery options) of a symptom management intervention in lung cancer patients. Methods: An application of Best-Worst scaling methodology was used. Effects (attributes) tested included the location of the intervention (home or hospital), type of trainer (health professional or trained volunteer), caregiver involvement or not, and intervention delivered individually or in groups of patients. Participants were asked to evaluate and compare their preferences (utilities) towards the different attribute levels within scenarios and select the pair of attribute levels that they consider to be furthest apart. Results: Eighty-seven patients with lung cancer participated. The most important preferences for an intervention included the location (being delivered at home) and delivered by a health care professional. The least important preference was the involvement of a caregiver. Gender had an effect on preferences, with females being less inclined than men to prefer to receive an intervention in the home than the hospital and less inclined than men to have no other patients present. Furthermore, older participants and those in advanced stages of their disease were less inclined to have no other patients present compared to younger participants and those with earlier stages of disease, respectively. Conclusion: Considering patient preferences is an important step in developing feasible, patient-centred, appropriate and methodologically rigorous interventions and this study provided indications of such patient preferences.

KW - Best Worst scaling

KW - Discrete Choices Experiment

KW - Intervention

KW - Lung cancer

KW - Preferences

KW - Symptom management

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84862826706&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.02.001

DO - 10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.02.001

M3 - Article

VL - 77

SP - 199

EP - 204

JO - Lung Cancer

JF - Lung Cancer

SN - 0169-5002

IS - 1

ER -