Understanding and using comparative healthcare information; the effect of the amount of information and consumer characteristics and skills
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.
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.
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.
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.
- Hibbard JH, Peters E: Supporting informed consumer health care decisions: data presentation approaches that facilitate the use of information in choice. Annu Rev Public Health 2003, 24:413–433. CrossRef
- Peters E, Dieckmann N, Dixon A, Hibbard JH, Mertz CK: Less is more in presenting quality information to consumers. Med Care Res Rev 2007, 64:169–190. CrossRef
- Marshall MN, Shekelle PG, Leatherman S, Brook RH: The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. JAMA 2000, 283:1866–1874. CrossRef
- Rothberg MB, Benjamin EM, Lindenauer PK: Public reporting of hospital quality: recommendations to benefit patients and hospitals. J Hosp Med 2009, 4:541–545.
- Edgman-Levitan S, Cleary PD: What information do consumers want and need? Health Aff 1996, 15:42–56. CrossRef
- Robinson S, Brodie M: Understanding the quality challenge for health consumers: the Kaiser/AHCPR Survey. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 1997, 23:239–244.
- Trotter MI, Morgan DW: Patients' use of the Internet for health related matters: a study of Internet usage in 2000 and 2006. Health Informatics J 2008, 14:175–181. CrossRef
- Coulter A: Do patients want a choice and does it work? BMJ 2010, 341:c4989. CrossRef
- Raven MC, Gillespie CC, Dibennardo R, Van Busum K, Elbel B: Vulnerable Patients' Perceptions of Health Care Quality and Quality Data. Med Decis Making 2012, 32:311–326. CrossRef
- Faber M, Bosch M, Wollersheim H, Leatherman S, Grol R: Public reporting in health care: how do consumers use quality-of-care information? A systematic review. Medical Care 2009, 47:1–8. CrossRef
- Ketelaar NA, Faber MJ, Flottorp S, Rygh LH, Deane KH, Eccles MP: Public release of performance data in changing the behaviour of healthcare consumers, professionals or organisations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011, 11:CD004538.
- Hanoch Y, Rice T: The economics of choice: lessons from the U.S. health-care market. Health Expect 2011, 14:105–112. CrossRef
- Greene J, Peters E, Mertz CK, Hibbard JH: Comprehension and choice of a consumer-directed health plan: an experimental study. Am J Manag Care 2008, 14:369–376.
- Bateman IJ, Cooper P, Georgiou S, Navrud S, Poe GL, Ready RC, et al.: Economic valuation of policies for managing acidity in remote mountain lakes: Examining validity through scope sensitivity testing. Aquatic Sciences 2005, 67:274–291.
- Slothuus U, Larsen ML, Junker P: The contingent ranking method–a feasible and valid method when eliciting preferences for health care? Soc Sci Med 2002, 54:1601–1609. CrossRef
- Smith VK, Desvousges W: Measuring Water Quality Benefits: the contingent ranking method and benefit estimation. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff; 1986.
- Slovic P: Towards understanding and improving decisions. In Human Performance and Productivity. Vol.2: Information processing and Decision Making. Edited by: Howell WC, Fleishman EA. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1982:157–183.
- Hibbard JH, Peters E, Slovic P, Finucane ML, Tusler M: Making health care quality reports easier to use. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 2001, 27:591–604.
- Gigerenzer G, Goldstein DG: Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. Psychol Rev 1996, 103:650–669. CrossRef
- Damman OC, Hendriks M, Rademakers J, Delnoij DM, Groenewegen PP: How do healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information? A qualitative study using cognitive interviews. BMC Public Health 2009, 9:423. CrossRef
- Donelan K, Rogers RS, Eisenhauer A, Mort E, Agnihotri AK: Consumer comprehension of surgeon performance data for coronary bypass procedures. Ann Thorac Surg 2011, 91:1400–1406. CrossRef
- Hibbard JH, Slovic P, Peters E, Finucane ML, Tusler M: Is the informed-choice policy approach appropriate for Medicare beneficiaries? Health Aff 2001, 20:199–203. CrossRef
- Tu HT, Hargraves JL: Seeking health care information: most consumers still on the sidelines. Issue Brief Cent Stud Health Syst Change 2003, 1:4.
- Reyna VF, Nelson WL, Han PK, Dieckmann NF: How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychol Bull 2009, 135:943–973. CrossRef
- OECD: Literacy in the Information Age. Final report of the international adult literacy survey. Paris; 2000.
- Berkman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE, Halpem DJ, Viera A, Crotty K, et al.: Health literacy Interventions and Outcomes: An updated Systematic Review. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2011. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 199
- Twickler TB, Hoogstraten E, Reuwer AQ, Singels L, Stronks K, Essink-Bot M: Laaggeletterdheid en beperkte gezondheidsvaardigheden vragen om een antwoord in de zorg. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2009, 153:A250.
- Fransen MP, Van Schaik TM, Twickler TB, Essink-Bot ML: Applicability of Internationally Available Health Literacy Measures in the Netherlands. J Health Commun 2011, 16:134–149. CrossRef
- Hibbard JH, Peters E, Dixon A, Tusler M: Consumer competencies and the use of comparative quality information: it isn't just about literacy. Med Care Res Rev 2007, 64:379–394. CrossRef
- Groenewoud AS: It’s your Choice! A study of search and selection processes, and the use of performance indicators in different patient groups. PhD thesis. Rotterdam: Erasmus University; 2008.
- Sixma HJ, Triemstra M, Delnoij DMJ: The Consumer Quality Index (CQI): background, general characteristics and advantages of a standardized approach to measure user views on quality of care [abstract]. Eur J Public Health 2007,17(suppl2):33–34.
- University language centre. http://www.uct.ugent.be/subExtra_TaaltestsBuitenlandseNedUGentTestNed.htm.
- Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG: The Role of Numeracy in Understanding the Benefit of Screening Mammograhpy. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:966–972.
- Peters E, Diefenbach MA, Hess TM, Vastfjall D: Age differences in dual information-processing modes: implications for cancer decision making. Cancer 2008, 113:3556–3567. CrossRef
- Moser A, Korstjens I, van der Weijden T, Tange H: Patient's decision making in selecting a hospital for elective orthopaedic surgery. J Eval Clin Pract 2010, 16:1262–1268. CrossRef
- Moser A, Korstjens I, van der Weijden T, Tange H: Themes affecting health-care consumers' choice of a hospital for elective surgery when receiving web-based comparative consumer information. Patient Educ Couns 2010, 78:365–371. CrossRef
- Greene J, Hibbard J, Tusler M: How Much Do Health Literacy and Patient Activation Contribute to Older Adults’ Ability to Manage Their Health?. Washington DC: AARP Public Policy Institute; 2005.
- Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, Tusler M: Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health Serv Res 2005, 40:1918–1930. CrossRef
- Fowles JB, Terry P, Xi M, Hibbard J, Bloom CT, Harvey L: Measuring self-management of patients' and employees' health: further validation of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) based on its relation to employee characteristics. Patient Educ Couns 2009, 77:116–122. CrossRef
- Nijman J, Hendriks M, Brabers M, De Jong J, Rademakers J: Patient activation and health literacy as predictors of health information use in a general sample of Dutch health care consumers. J Health Commun in press
- Peters E, Hibbard J, Slovic P, Dieckmann N: Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. Health Aff 2007, 26:741–748. CrossRef
- Hibbard JH, Greene J, Daniel D: What is quality anyway? Performance reports that clearly communicate to consumers the meaning of quality of care. Med Care Res Rev 2010, 67:275–293. CrossRef
- Lipkus IM, Klein WM, Rimer BK: Communicating breast cancer risks to women using different formats. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001, 10:895–898.
- Deen D, Lu WH, Rothstein D, Santana L, Gold MR: Asking questions: the effect of a brief intervention in community health centers on patient activation. Patient Educ Couns 2011, 84:257–260. CrossRef
- Frosch DL, Rincon D, Ochoa S, Mangione CM: Activating seniors to improve chronic disease care: results from a pilot intervention study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2010, 58:1496–1503. CrossRef
- The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/12/101/prepub
- Understanding and using comparative healthcare information; the effect of the amount of information and consumer characteristics and skills
- Open Access
- Available under Open Access This content is freely available online to anyone, anywhere at any time.
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
- Online Date
- September 2012
- Online ISSN
- BioMed Central
- Additional Links
- Healthcare consumers
- Comparative healthcare information
- Amount of information
- Sociodemographic characteristics
- Author Affiliations
- 1. NIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, P.O. Box 1568, Utrecht, 3500 BN, the Netherlands
- 2. Department of Public and Occupational Health and the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands