Behavioural Economics and Human Decision Making: Instances from the Health Care System

Over the last two decades behavioural economics has gained much momentum among scholars because of its innovative and controversial ways of explaining processes and mechanisms underpinning individuals’ judgements and decision making. Thanks to these features, behavioural economics has been applied to diversified domains, namely finance, public choice and marketing. Although the intrinsic characteristics of the health care sector, ranging from incomplete and asymmetrical information to high frequency of critical choices, make the sector a fertile ground for behavioural economics applications, research on the influences of behavioural economics on health care and clinical decision making are still rather fragmented. Therefore, through an interdisciplinary literature review integrating behavioural economics research with medical and behavioural decision-making studies, this article contributes to behavioural decision-making literature by providing a wide overview of how behavioural economics strategies may impact, and be implemented in, diverse health care circumstances. Examples of behavioural economics applications to health care circumstances include: organ donation and transplantation; habitual choices; individuals’ loss aversion and trust; present-biased preference; decision fatigue and excessive choice. Hence, this article aims to promote the effective behaviour of both consumers and providers in health care.     

Development of a new pregnancy informational and decisional needs survey for women with physical disabilities

BackgroundWhile the literature on pregnancy and disability is growing, generating important knowledge of barriers to care and health risks, there is limited literature on pregnancy decision-making and informational needs. Such knowledge is critical for the development of interventions to mitigate the challenges women with disabilities and health care providers face in making this important decision.Objective/Hypothesis: Develop a survey of pregnancy decisional and informational needs of women with physical disabilities.MethodsWe developed a conceptual framework that guided item writing, defined the characteristics of the target population, engaged stakeholders with disabilities to collaborate with investigators, and tested the interpretability and relevance of items, and preferred mode of responding (online vs. telephone). A total of 123 women participated in cognitive interviews (N = 13), mode testing (N = 10), or survey data collection (N = 114).ResultsInstructions, three screening questions, and 156 items were tested in one round of 17 cognitive interviews; 25 items were deleted, 94 were revised, and 37 items were retained without changes. The final version of the survey included six sub-sections: the experience of making a decision; information about pregnancy and disability; things affecting a decision; knowing what is important; support for making a decision; and working with health care providers.ConclusionsThe overall performance of the survey supported its content validity and utility as a useful way to gather information about the pregnancy decision-making experience and informational needs of women with physical disabilities.     

Patient decision making among older individuals with cancer

Patient decision making is an area of increasing inquiry. For older individuals experiencing cancer, variations in health and functional status, physiologic aspects of aging, and tension between quality and quantity of life present unique challenges to treatment-related decision making. We used the pragmatic utility method to analyze the concept of patient decision making in the context of older individuals with cancer. We first evaluated its maturity in existing literature and then posed analytical questions to clarify aspects found to be only partially mature. In this context, we found patient decision making to be an ongoing process, changing with time, reflecting individual and relational components, as well as analytical and emotional ones. Assumptions frequently associated with patient decision making were not consistent with the empirical literature. Careful attention to the multifaceted components of patient decision making among older individuals with cancer provides guidance for research, supportive interventions, and targeted follow-up care.     

Dissemination of effectiveness and outcomes research

Effectiveness and outcomes research seeks to improve patients' health outcomes by improving the quality of the health care they receive. Dissemination of the findings of such research is a necessary step in that process. This paper reviews what is known about designing and disseminating effective information packages aimed at health care providers (mainly physicians), where effectiveness means promoting behavior change on the part of practitioners that leads to better patient care. Practice-relevant research information is delivered to providers through publication of results from randomized clinical trials, dissemination of consensus recommendations, development and use of computer-based aids to clinical decision making, and provision of continuing medical education. Each of these areas offers numerous examples of the exceedingly modest behavioral response that can be expected from the mere provision of information. The literature also offers some principles that may improve the chances for success, including the desirability of techniques that involve face-to-face interaction, promoting the active involvement of the learner, repeating the message, making recommendations explicit and relevant to clinical practice, and making use of opinion leaders and peer influence. Little basic research has been done on providers' motivations and actual decision-making processes. Research aimed at furthering a behavioral science of providers could yield new insights on effective dissemination strategies as well.     

Investment decision making in the health care industry: the future.

The economic and political environment in which providers of health care will operate during the 1980s will continue to be increasingly restrictive. Any private-sector organization's long-run survival depends directly on the quality of its investment decisions, broadly defined. This decision making will require three major innovations if private sector health care providers are to survive: 1) traditional biases about the economics of not-for-profit entities must be abandoned; 2) standard data, procedures, and personnel from the accounting discipline must be supplemented with information, methodologies, and people from the discipline of corporate finance; and 3) economic and fiscal risk must be measured and incorporated into both investment decisions and interactions with external regulators. Practitioners can begin to implement these innovations immediately. Although substantial literature exists developing all these concepts generally and applying them to for-profit settings, the literature purporting to treat investment decision making for private-sector health care providers is, on average, replete with conceptual error, simplistic thinking, erroneous applications, and out-of-date methodologies. The literature is, in a word, horrid. Authors, both practitioner and academic, should stop writing terrible books and booklike periodicals for easy royalty dollars, and, instead, pursue sound applied research and disseminate their results in classrooms and in refereed journals.     

USING THE LONGTERM CARE INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY CARE

Obtaining appropriate long-term care is a problem common to individuals in need. community service providers, regulatory agencies. and fiscal intermediaries. The fragmented nature of the long-term care system precludes natural linkages among service programs. The Long-Term Care information System Assessment Process was developed anddemonstrated to be a communication link among programs and agenciesconcerned with long-term care. The use of its common language tools for decision making and program organization leads to the provision of appropriate long-term care, efficient use of resources, and effective community care.     

Decision aid tools to support women's decision making in pregnancy and birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Support for a model of shared medical decision making, where women and their care providers discuss risks and benefits of their different options, reveal their preferences, and jointly make a decision, is a growing expectation in obstetric care. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of different decision aid tools compared to regular care for women facing several options in the specific field of obstetric care. We included published studies about interventions designed to aid mothers' decision making and provide information about obstetrical treatment or screening options. Following a search of electronic databases for articles published in English and French from 1994 to 2010, we found ten studies that met the inclusion criteria. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we found that all decision aid tools, except for Decision Trees, facilitated significant increases in knowledge. The Computer-based Information Tool, the Decision Analysis Tools, Individual Counseling and Group Counseling intervention presented significant results in reducing anxiety levels. The Decision Analysis Tools and the Computer-based Information tool were associated with a reduction in levels of decisional conflict. The Decision Analysis Tool was the only tool that presented evidence of an impact on the final choice and final outcome. Decision aid tools can assist health professionals to provide information and counseling about choices during pregnancy and support women in shared decision making. The choice of a specific tool should depend on resources available to support their use as well as the specific decisions being faced by women, their health care setting and providers.     

Promoting informed decisions about cancer screening in communities and healthcare systems

Individuals are increasingly involved in decisions about their health care. Shared decision making (SDM), an intervention in the clinical setting in which patients and providers collaborate in decision making, is an important approach for informing patients and involving them in their health care. However, SDM cannot bear the entire burden for informing and involving individuals. Population-oriented interventions to promote informed decision making (IDM) should also be explored.This review provides a conceptual background for population-oriented interventions to promote informed decisions (IDM interventions), followed by a systematic review of studies of IDM interventions to promote cancer screening. This review specifically asked whether IDM interventions (1) promote understanding of cancer screening, (2) facilitate participation in decision making about cancer screening at a level that is comfortable for individuals; or (3) encourage individuals to make cancer-screening decisions that are consistent with their preferences and values.Fifteen intervention arms met the intervention definition. They used small media, counseling, small-group education, provider-oriented strategies, or combinations of these to promote IDM. The interventions were generally consistent in improving individuals' knowledge about the disease, accuracy of risk perceptions, or knowledge and beliefs about the pros and cons of screening and treatment options. However, few studies evaluated whether these interventions resulted in individuals participating in decision making at a desirable level, or whether they led to decisions that were consistent with individuals' values and preferences.More research is needed on how best to promote and facilitate individuals' participation in health care. Work is especially needed on how to facilitate participation at a level desired by individuals, how to promote decisions by patients that are consistent with their preferences and values, how to perform effective and cost-effective IDM interventions for healthcare systems and providers and in community settings (outside of clinical settings), and how to implement these interventions in diverse populations (such as populations that are older, nonwhite, or disadvantaged). Finally, work is needed on the presence and magnitude of barriers to and harms of IDM interventions and how they might be avoided.     

The use of computer-based simulation in a Master of Health Administration curriculum.

In this paper, the use of a simulation tool to support the appreciation of data and information by health administration students with varied backgrounds and educational training is discussed. Specifically, the authors developed educational and training material that can be used in a variety of courses to improve information management and decision making. Improved information management is being recognized as a critical component of the movement to achieve consistent quality in patient care, institutional performance, and policy planning. This is now especially important as new information systems are making data and good quality evidence increasingly more available. Ultimately, it is hoped that this process will lead to findings that will assist evidence-based decision making within all health providers.     

The willingness to pay for in vitro fertilization-related information and its attributes: a cross-sectional study in Israel

Market failure is defined by the departure from a Pareto-optimal equilibrium, in which no individuals could be made better off without making some other individual or individuals’ worse off. In health care there are many causes of market failure which weaken the efficiency of the health management system. Among these are incomplete information and information asymmetry between information providers and consumers. There is scant extant literature on the empirical valuation of health related information. The objective of this study is to measure the willingness-to-pay (WTP) for in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment-related information and its attributes, and to analyse the factors affecting WTP, because of the apparent problems in providing information and the absence of specific guidelines for Israeli health care providers regarding IVF-related information, caused by limited time and resources, making it difficult for medical providers to interact adequately with IVF patients. There is a need for changes in government and health care policy in order to deal with these market failures. The study employed contingent valuation (CV) using the WTP technique as the method of economic evaluation. This method shows stated individual preferences as derived from direct responses to hypothetical questions. The empirical results are based on surveys of two Israeli population groups: patients undergoing IVF treatments in public health units and the general public. IVF patients and the general public value IVF-related information and reveal a positive WTP for it. The average WTP for IVF-related information amongst IVF patients is US$437.02, whereas for the general public it is US$546.56. In the Israeli health market, IVF-related information is not fully circulated by providers to their patients, although this information is valued by IVF patients and the general public. The market and policy failures present in the health care market in Israel should be addressed. The failure of the Israeli health care market to supply adequate IVF-related information constitutes the basis for rationalizing government intervention in market allocations of health goods and services. Administrators must recognize the necessity of providing information with respect to treatment options, treatment cycle success rates, possible side effects, clinical processes treatment costs, etc., since it is an important factor in the individual’s utility function. Government intervention should include direct and indirect regulations. The study addresses some of the biases commonly associated with CV methodology—the existence of embedding effects.     

Clinical practice guidelines. The Agency for Health Care Policy and Research fosters the development of evidence-based guidelines

As medical technology increases rapidly and becomes more complex, clinical practice guidelines can help healthcare providers assess current practices and integrate technological advances. Through the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR), the federal government has begun to facilitate the development of clinical practice guidelines. Expert or contract panels, authorized by the AHCPR, develop guidelines on specific clinical conditions. The AHCPR guideline methodology is designed to produce evidence-based guidelines that are valid, clinically applicable, and clinically flexible. Each panel spends a year or more developing the guideline, beginning with an extensive literature search and review. The panel prepares evidence tables, statistically analyzes aggregate data (where appropriate), conducts harm and benefit analyses, and prepares health policy analyses (or cost-impact studies). During this process, the panel holds an open forum to solicit comments on the guideline topic. After this public discussion, the panel prepares a final draft of the guideline. Several hundred individuals review the guideline. Some policymakers believe clinical practice guidelines can lead to better healthcare outcomes. Guidelines can provide information in a useful format for clinicians to use at the bedside or the point of decision making in patient care. Guidelines also provide information that can be used in continuing education and professional education programs.     

Informing and involving patients to improve the quality of medical decisions

Good-quality care requires that procedures, treatments, and tests be not only medically appropriate, but also desired by informed patients. Current evidence shows that most medical decisions are made by physicians with little input from patients. This article describes issues surrounding informed patient decision making and the steps necessary to improve the way decisions are made. Creating incentives for providers and health care organizations to inform patients and incorporate patients' goals into decisions is critical. Patient surveys are needed to monitor the quality of decision making. Health information technology can help by collecting information from patients about their symptoms, how well they understand their options, and what is important to them, and sharing that information with providers. We review public and private developments that could facilitate the development of tools and methods to improve patient-centered care.     

Shared decision making in clinical medicine: past research and future directions

CONTENT: Shared medical decision making is a process by which patients and providers consider outcome probabilities and patient preferences and reach a health care decision based on mutual agreement. Shared decision making is best used for problems involving medical uncertainty. During the process the provider-patient dyad considers treatment options and consequences and explores the fit of expected benefits and consequences of treatment with patient preferences for various outcomes. This paper reviews the literature on shared medical decision making. Several questions are considered. Although several studies suggest that patients do not want to be involved in decision making, these studies typically fail to separate decisions about technical aspects of treatment from preferences for outcomes. There is considerable evidence that patients want to be consulted about the impact of treatment. Studies on the acceptability of shared decision making for physicians have produced inconsistent results. Shared decision making is more acceptable to younger and better-educated patients. It remains unclear whether shared decision making requires expensive video presentations or whether the same results can be obtained with simpler methods, such as the decision board. We conclude that shared medical decision making is an important development in health care. More research is necessary to identify the effects of shared decision making on patient satisfaction and health outcomes. Further, more research is necessary in order to evaluate the most effective methods for engaging patients in decisions about their own health care.     

Patient Decision Aids for Prenatal Genetic Testing: Probability,Embodiment, and Problematic Integration

Patient decision aids (PDAs) are documents that attempt to support patient participation in biomedical decision making by discussing information and options. Scholars have called for further elaboration and application of communication theory relating to the construction and uses of PDAs. This article analyzes gateway documents, a genre of PDAs that includes texts from noncommercial websites returned during an initial inquiry for decision-making information. Problematic integration theory informs and extends a meaning of balance in a sample of four PDAs for prenatal genetic testing. The study addresses several communication opportunities, including discussions of benefits, disadvantages, providers’ scientific knowledge, and patients’ embodied knowledge. The PDA authors’ emphases on statistical risk without more inclusive considerations of embodied knowledge highlight a conclusion that the documents in the sample are imbalanced. This research serves to introduce a theoretical communication context for analysis of PDAs that may assist scholars in further contributions to the interdisciplinary field of biomedical communication.     

‘I just want to be able to make a choice’: Results from citizen deliberations about mammography screening in Ontario,Canada

Despite Canada’s long history with mammography screening, little is known about citizens’ perspectives about mammography and how best to support women to make informed choices about screening. To address this gap, a series of four citizen deliberation events were held in 2015-16 in Ontario, a Canadian province with an organized population-based breast screening program in place since 1990. Forty-nine individuals participated in four citizen panels, each comprising an information session highlighting the evidence about mammography, and large- and small-group deliberations about approaches to support informed decision making for screening. Following their engagement with the research evidence about mammography, participants expressed concern about their lack of full awareness of the risks and benefits and a strong desire for choice when it comes to screening. To support informed choice, mammography programs need to reflect the values of information sharing, trust and transparency, financial accountability, and allow for personal interactions and shared decision-making. Citizens are looking for balanced information about the risks and benefits of screening presented in an easy to understand, comprehensive, and transparent manner. Primary health care providers and organized screening programs are important sources of information about mammography and must be vigilant in their efforts to support informed decision-making in this area by ensuring that the information materials they are using are balanced and reflect current evidence.     

Shared mind: communication, decision making, and autonomy in serious illness

In the context of serious illness, individuals usually rely on others to help them think and feel their way through difficult decisions. To help us to understand why, when, and how individuals involve trusted others in sharing information, deliberation, and decision making, we offer the concept of shared mind-ways in which new ideas and perspectives can emerge through the sharing of thoughts, feelings, perceptions, meanings, and intentions among 2 or more people. We consider how shared mind manifests in relationships and organizations in general, building on studies of collaborative cognition, attunement, and sensemaking. Then, we explore how shared mind might be promoted through communication, when appropriate, and the implications of shared mind for decision making and patient autonomy. Next, we consider a continuum of patient-centered approaches to patient-clinician interactions. At one end of the continuum, an interactional approach promotes knowing the patient as a person, tailoring information, constructing preferences, achieving consensus, and promoting relational autonomy. At the other end, a transactional approach focuses on knowledge about the patient, information-as-commodity, negotiation, consent, and individual autonomy. Finally, we propose that autonomy and decision making should consider not only the individual perspectives of patients, their families, and members of the health care team, but also the perspectives that emerge from the interactions among them. By drawing attention to shared mind, clinicians can observe in what ways they can promote it through bidirectional sharing of information and engaging in shared deliberation.     

EBM,HTA, and CER: Clearing the Confusion

Context: The terms evidence-based medicine (EBM), health technology assessment (HTA), comparative effectiveness research (CER), and other related terms lack clarity and so could lead to miscommunication, confusion, and poor decision making. The objective of this article is to clarify their definitions and the relationships among key terms and concepts.Methods: This article used the relevant methods and policy literature as well as the websites of organizations engaged in evidence-based activities to develop a framework to explain the relationships among the terms EBM, HTA, and CER.Findings: This article proposes an organizing framework and presents a graphic demonstrating the differences and relationships among these terms and concepts.Conclusions: More specific terminology and concepts are necessary for an informed and clear public policy debate. They are even more important to inform decision making at all levels and to engender more accountability by the organizations and individuals responsible for these decisions.     

Hormonal contraception,breastfeeding and bedside advocacy: the case for patient-centered care

Postpartum contraceptive decision making is complex, and recommendations may be influenced by breastfeeding intentions. While biologically plausible, concerns about the adverse impact of hormonal contraception on breast milk production have not been supported by the clinical evidence to date. However, the data have limitations, which can lead providers with different priorities around contraception and breastfeeding to interpret the data in a way that advances their personal priorities. Discrepancies in interpretations can lead to divergent recommendations for individual women and may cause conflict. Furthermore, providers must recognize that decision making about contraception and breastfeeding takes place in complex cultural, historical and socioeconomic contexts. Implicit bias may influence a provider's counseling. Unrecognized biases toward one patient or another, or one practice or another, may influence a provider's counseling. It is crucial for providers to strive to recognize their own biases. Providers need to respectfully recognize each patient's values and preferences regarding hormonal contraception and breastfeeding. Developing a patient-centered decision tool or implementing patient-centered interview techniques specifically around breastfeeding and contraception could help to minimize provider-driven variability in care.     

What matters most? The content and concordance of patients' and providers' information priorities for contraceptive decision making

Objective(s)

The objective of this study was to identify women's and health care providers' information priorities for contraceptive decision making and counseling, respectively.

Study Design

Cross-sectional surveys were administered online to convenience samples of 417 women and 188 contraceptive care providers residing in the United States. Participants were provided with a list of 34 questions related to the features of contraceptive options and rated the importance of each. Participants also ranked the questions in descending order of importance. For both women and providers, we calculated the mean importance rating for each question and the proportion that ranked each question in their three most important questions.

Results

The average importance ratings given by women and providers were similar for 18 questions, but dissimilar for the remaining 16 questions. The question rated most important for women was “How does it work to prevent pregnancy?” whereas, for providers, “How often does a patient need to remember to use it?” and “How is it used?” were rated equally. The eight questions most frequently selected in the top three by women and/or providers were related to the safety of the method, mechanism of action, mode of use, side effects, typical- and perfect-use effectiveness, frequency of administration and when it begins to prevent pregnancy.

Conclusion(s)

Although we found considerable concordance between women's and provider's information priorities, the presence of some inconsistencies highlights the importance of patient-centered contraceptive counseling and, in particular, shared contraceptive decision making.

Implications

This study provides insights into the information priorities of women for their contraceptive decision making and health care providers for contraceptive counseling. These insights are critical both to inform the development of decision support tools for implementation in contraceptive care and to guide the delivery of patient-centered care.