Cost-Benefit Analysis of an Otolaryngology Emergency Room Using a Contingent Valuation Approach

Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology Part XII: Assessing Patient Preferences

OBJECTIVE

To provide a contemporary resource to update clinicians and researchers on the current state of assessment of patient preferences.

DATA SOURCES

Published studies and literature regarding patient preferences, evidence-based practice, and patient-centered management in otolaryngology.

REVIEW METHODS

Patients make choices based on both physician input and their own preferences. These preferences are informed by personal values and attitudes, and they ideally result from a deliberative evaluation of the risks, benefits, and other outcomes pertaining to medical care. To date, rigorous evaluation of patient preferences for otolaryngologic conditions has not been integrated into clinical practice or research. This installment of the "Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology" series focuses on formal assessment of patient preferences and the optimal methods to determine them.

CONCLUSIONS

Methods have been developed to optimize our understanding of patient preferences.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Understanding these patient preferences may help promote an evidence-based approach to the care of individual patients.

Patient Preferences in Subglottic Stenosis Treatment: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Objectives Subglottic stenosis can be addressed with several different surgical techniques, but patient preferences for these treatment modalities are poorly understood. Economic methods are increasingly being used to understand how patients make decisions. The objective of this pilot study was to assess preferences in subglottic stenosis treatment using patient-centric stated preference techniques. Study Design Discrete choice experiment (DCE). Setting Academic research facility. Subjects and Methods A computer-based DCE was administered in a monitored setting to volunteers from the general population. Signs and symptoms of subglottic stenosis were described, and participants were asked to imagine they had subglottic stenosis. Hypothetical treatments were offered, with 5 systematically varied attributes: need for external incision, length of hospital stay, postoperative voice quality, likelihood of repeat procedures, and risk of complication. A conditional logistic model was used to assess the relative attribute importance. Results In total, 162 participants were included. Attributes with the greatest impact on decision making included potential need for repeat procedures (importance 30.2%; P < .001), amount of operative risk (importance 28.1%; P < .001), and postoperative voice quality (importance 27.7%; P < .001), whereas presence of incision (importance 5.0%; P = .001) was less important, and hospital stay was not (importance 9.0%; P = .089). Based on aggregate responses for these attributes, the model demonstrated that most participants (80.4%) would prefer endoscopic surgery for subglottic stenosis as opposed to open tracheal resection (19.6%). Conclusion In this pilot population, most participants preferred voice-sparing, low-risk procedures as treatment for subglottic stenosis, consistent with an endoscopic approach, even if multiple procedures were required.

Referral patterns from emergency department to otolaryngology clinic

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with various otolaryngologic disorders are frequently referred to an otolaryngologist for follow-up care. Our aim was to further characterize this group as it has not been well described in the literature.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional retrospective study.

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of patients seen during an 18-month period in an urban public hospital trauma center adult ED and referred to an otolaryngology clinic for follow-up care.

RESULTS

Seven hundred thirty-eight patients were seen and referred; the most common diagnoses made by ED providers were peripheral vertigo (12%), otitis externa (8%), and nasal fractures (8%). Nine percent of patients were evaluated during their ED visit by an otolaryngology provider. Three hundred seventy-two (50%) patients returned for their otolaryngology clinic visit; facial trauma patients were least likely to return. The most common diagnoses made by otolaryngology providers were otitis externa (12%), peripheral vertigo (12%), and nasal fractures (7%). There was 50% concordance between patients' diagnoses made by ED and otolaryngology providers. The most common differences were otitis media versus otitis externa (10%) and acute pharyngitis versus laryngopharyngeal reflux (8%). During 37% of follow-up visits, an in-office procedure was performed, most commonly flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy, cerumen removal, and nasal endoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis reports comprehensive characteristics of this referral group, identifying potential areas for improvement in patient management, resident education and efficiency. Otolaryngologists covering EDs should be familiar with this population in terms of types of cases that may affect their practices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 128:1062-1067, 2018.

What Do Patients Want from Otolaryngologists? A Discrete Choice Experiment

Objectives Patient preferences are crucial for the delivery of patient-centered care. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are an emerging quantitative methodology used for understanding these preferences. In this study, we employed DCE techniques to understand the preferences of patients presenting for an ear, nose, and throat clinic visit. Study Design DCE. Setting Decision science laboratory. Methods A DCE survey of 5 attributes-wait time, physician experience, physician personality, utilization of visit time, and cost/copayment-was constructed with structured qualitative interviews with patients. The DCE was administered to participants from the general population, who chose among hypothetical scenarios that varied across these attributes. A conditional logit model was used to determine relative attribute importance, with a separate logit model for determining subject effects. Results A total of 161 participants were included. Cost/copayment had the greatest impact on decision making (importance, 32.2%), followed by wait time and physician experience (26.5% and 24.7%, respectively). Physician personality mattered least (4.7%), although all attributes were significantly correlated to decision making. Participants preferred doctors who spent more time performing physical examination than listening or explaining. Participants were willing to pay $52 extra to avoid a 4-week delay in appointment time; $87 extra for a physician with 10 years of experience (vs 0 years); and $9 extra for a caring, friendly, and compassionate doctor (vs formal, efficient, and business-like). Conclusion DCEs allow for powerful economic analyses that may help physicians understand patient preferences. Our model showed that cost is an important factor to patients and that patients are willing to pay extra for timely appointments, experience, and thorough physical examination.