Perceived Importance of the Benefits and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Best-Worst Scaling Study.

OBJECTIVES: To elicit the relative importance of the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among potential screening participants in the Dutch population. METHODS: In a consensus meeting with 11 experts, risk reduction of CRC and CRC deaths (benefits) and complications from colonoscopy, stress of receiving positive fecal immunological test (FIT) results, as well as false-positive and false-negative FIT results (harms) were selected as determinant end points to consider during decision making. We conducted an online best-worst scaling survey among adults aged 55 to 75 years from the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel of The Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research to elicit preference values for these outcomes. The preference values were estimated using conditional logit regression. RESULTS: Of 265 participants, 234 (89%) had ever participated in CRC screening. Compared with the stress of receiving a positive FIT result, the outcome perceived most important was the risk of CRC death (odds ratio [OR] 4.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-5.1), followed by risk of CRC (OR 4.1; 95% CI 3.6-4.7), a false-negative FIT result (OR 3.1; 95% CI 2.7-3.5), colonoscopy complications (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4-1.8), and a false-positive FIT result (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.3-1.6). The magnitude of these differences in perceived importance varied according to age, educational level, ethnic background, and whether the individual had previously participated in CRC screening. CONCLUSION: Dutch men and women eligible for FIT-based CRC screening perceive the benefits of screening to be more important than the harms.

The relation between trust and the willingness of enrollees to receive healthcare advice from their health insurer.

BACKGROUND: In a healthcare system based on managed competition, it is important that health insurers are able to channel enrollees to preferred providers. This results in incentives for healthcare providers to improve the quality and reduce the price of care. One of the instruments to guide enrollees to preferred providers is by providing healthcare advice. In order to use healthcare advice as an effective instrument, it is important that enrollees accept the health insurer as a healthcare advisor. As trust in health insurers is not high, this may be an obstacle for enrollees to be receptive to the health insurer's advice. This study aims to investigate the association between trust in the health insurer and the willingness to receive healthcare advice from the health insurer in the Netherlands. In terms of receiving healthcare advice, we examine both enrollees' willingness to approach the health insurer themselves and their willingness to be approached by the health insurer. METHODS: In February 2021, a questionnaire was sent to a representative sample of the Dutch population. The questionnaire was completed by 885 respondents (response rate 59%). Respondents were asked about their willingness to receive healthcare advice, and trust in the health insurer was measured using a validated multiple item scale. Logistic regression models were conducted to analyse the results. RESULTS: Enrollees with more trust in the health insurer were more willing to approach their health insurer for healthcare advice (OR = 1.07, p = 0.00). In addition, a higher level of trust in the health insurer is significantly associated with the odds that enrollees would like it/really appreciate it if their health insurer actively approached them with healthcare advice (OR = 1.07, p = 0.00). The role of trust in the willingness to receive healthcare advice is not proven to differ between groups with regard to educational levels, health status or age. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that trust plays a role in the willingness to receive healthcare advice from the health insurer. The association between the two emphasizes the importance to increase enrollees' trust in the health insurer. As a result, health insurers may be better able to fulfil their role as healthcare advisor.

Public engagement in decision-making regarding the management of the COVID-19 epidemic: Views and expectations of the 'publics'.

BACKGROUND: In the management of epidemics, like COVID-19, trade-offs have to be made between reducing mortality and morbidity and minimizing socioeconomic and political consequences. Traditionally, epidemic management (EM) has been guided and executed attentively by experts and policymakers. It can, however, still be controversial in the public sphere. In the last decades, public engagement (PE) has been successfully applied in various aspects of healthcare. This leads to the question if PE could be implemented in EM decision-making. METHODS: From June to October 2020, seven deliberative discussion focus groups were executed with 35 Dutch citizens between 19 and 84 years old. Their views on PE in COVID-19 management were explored. The deliberative approach allows for the education of participants on the topic before the discussion. The benefits, barriers, timing and possible forms of PE in EM were discussed. RESULTS: Almost all participants supported PE in EM, as they thought that integrating their experiences and ideas would benefit the quality of EM, and increase awareness and acceptance of measures. A fitting mode for PE was consultation, as it was deemed important to provide the public with possibilities to share ideas and feedback; however, final authority remained with experts. The publics could particularly provide input about communication campaigns and control measures. PE could be executed after the first acute phase of the epidemic and during evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the construction of an empirically informed framework about the values and conditions for PE in EM from the perspective of the public. Participants expressed support to engage certain population groups and considered it valuable for the quality and effectiveness of EM; however, they expressed doubts about the feasibility of PE and the capabilities of citizens. In future studies, these results should be confirmed by a broader audience. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patients or members of the public were involved in the construction and execution of this study. This study was very exploratory, to gain a first insight into the views of the public in the Netherlands, and will be used to develop engagement practices accordingly. At this stage, the involvement of the public was not yet appropriate.

Dynamic Public Perceptions of the Coronavirus Disease Crisis, the Netherlands, 2020.

A key component of outbreak control is monitoring public perceptions and public response. To determine public perceptions and public responses during the first 3 months of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in the Netherlands, we conducted 6 repeated surveys of ≈3,000 persons. Generalized estimating equations analyses revealed changes over time as well as differences between groups at low and high risk. Overall, respondents perceived the risks associated with COVID-19 to be considerable, were positive about the mitigation measures, trusted the information and the measures from authorities, and adopted protective measures. Substantial increases were observed in risk perceptions and self-reported protective behavior in the first weeks of the outbreak. Individual differences were based mainly on participants' age and health condition. We recommend that authorities constantly adjust their COVID-19 communication and mitigation strategies to fit public perceptions and public responses and that they tailor the information for different groups.

Development and validation of a self-report measure of practical barriers to medication adherence: The medication practical barriers to adherence questionnaire (MPRAQ).

AIM: This study reports the development and validation of a new self-report measure, the Medication Practical barriers to Adherence Questionnaire (MPRAQ), which assesses practical barriers to medication adherence. METHODS: The MPRAQ comprises 15 statements describing practical barriers. Responses are scored on a 5-point Likert scale; higher scores indicate more practical barriers. Initial face validity was evaluated by cognitive testing with patients from a diabetes support group. Following refinement, internal reliability and construct validity were assessed in two samples: patients recruited via Amazon mTurk and the Nivel Dutch Healthcare Consumer Panel (COPA). Respondents completed the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ-General and BMQ-Specific), and the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5). The mTurk sample also completed the Perceived Sensitivity to Medicines questionnaire (PSM) and repeated the MPRAQ 2 weeks later to assess test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Face validity was evaluated in 15 patients (46% female; mean (SD) age 64 (12) years). A total of 184 mTurk participants completed the questionnaire (in English) and 334 in COPA (in Dutch). Internal reliability was acceptable (mTurk α = 0.89; COPA α = 0.94). Construct validity was confirmed, with significant correlation between the MPRAQ and BMQ-Specific Concerns (mTurk r = 0.546, P < .0001; COPA r = 0.370, P < .0001), BMQ-General Harm (mTurk r = 0.504, P < 0.0001; COPA r = 0.219, P < .0001), BMQ-General Overuse (mTurk r = 0.324, P < .0001; COPA r = 0.109, P = .047) and PSM (mTurk only r = 0.463, P < .0001), and a negative correlation with MARS-5 (mTurk r = -0.450, P < .0001; COPA r = -0.260, P < .0001). MPRAQ did not correlate with BMQ-Specific Necessity or BMQ-General Benefit. Correlation between MPRAQ baseline and 2-week follow-up scores confirmed test-retest reliability (r = 0.745, P < .0001; n = 52). CONCLUSION: MPRAQ is a reliable and valid self-report measure of practical adherence barriers.

Why do people not switch insurer in a market-based health insurance market? Empirical evidence from the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In market-based systems, the possibility to switch is an important precondition for a well-functioning health insurance market. To assess whether such a market works as intended, insight into the considerations and perceived barriers of insured is needed. This study examines the rates and reasons for not switching health insurer in the Netherlands, and whether these reasons differ between the general population and the population of people with a chronic illness. METHODS: We made use of survey data collected in 2017 among two panels representing the general population (n = 659, response 44%) and the chronically ill population (n = 1593, response 86%). RESULTS: We found differences regarding the reasons for not switching insurer. The chronically ill population seems to attach more importance to reasons related to the coverage of the health plan, whereas the general population is more focused on the level of service. Some people who considered switching experienced barriers, however, these barriers were not significantly more experienced by the chronically ill population. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals differences between the general population and the chronically ill population when examining reasons for not switching related to quality and coverage. A subset from the people who initially considered to switch experienced barriers which might have altered their decision. Further research is recommended to include questions about information search behaviour to examine which consumers make an informed decision for not switching, and for whom barriers limit switching.

Does the chronically ill population in the Netherlands switch their health insurer as often as the general population? Empirical evidence from a nationwide survey study.

BACKGROUND: Consumer mobility is an important aspect of a health insurance system based on managed competition. Both the general population and insured with a chronic illness should enjoy an equal opportunity to switch their insurer every year. We studied possible differences in the rates of switching between these two groups in the Netherlands. METHODS: A structured questionnaire was sent to 1500 members of Nivel's Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (response rate: 47%) and to 1911 chronically ill members of the National Panel of the Chronically ill and Disabled (response rate: 84%) in February 2016. Associations between switching and background characteristics were estimated using logistic regression analyses with interaction effects. RESULTS: In general, we did not find significant differences in switching rates between the general population and chronically ill population. However, a combination of the population and background characteristics demonstrated that young insured with a chronic illness switched significantly less often than young insured from the general population (1% versus 17%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrated that the group of young people with a chronic illness is less inclined to switch insurer. This observation suggests that this group might either face difficulties or barriers which prevents them from switching, or that they experience a high level of satisfaction with their current insurer. Further research should therefore focus on unravelling the mechanisms which explain the differences in switching rates.

Features of a Patient Portal for Blood Test Results and Patient Health Engagement: Web-Based Pre-Post Experiment.

BACKGROUND: The use of patient portals for presenting health-related patient data, such as blood test results, is becoming increasingly important in health practices. Patient portals have the potential to enhance patient health engagement, but content might be misinterpreted. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to discover whether the way of presenting blood test outcomes in an electronic patient portal is associated with patient health engagement and whether this varies across different blood test outcomes. METHODS: A 2x3 between-subjects experiment was conducted among members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel. All participants read a scenario in which they were asked to imagine themselves receiving blood test results. These results differed in terms of the presented blood values (ie, normal vs partially abnormal vs all abnormal) as well as in terms of whether the results were accompanied with explanatory text and visualization. Patient health engagement was measured both before (T0) and after (T1) participants were exposed to their fictive blood test results. RESULTS: A total 487 of 900 invited members responded (response rate 54%), of whom 50.3% (245/487) were female. The average age of the participants was 52.82 years (SD 15.41 years). Patient health engagement saw either a significant decrease or a nonsignificant difference in the experimental groups after viewing the blood test results. The mean difference was smaller in the groups that received blood test results with additional text and visualization (meanT0 5.33, SE 0.08; meanT1 5.14, SE 0.09; mean difference 0.19, SE 0.08, P=.02) compared with groups that received blood test results without explanatory text and visualization (meanT0 5.19, SE 0.08; meanT1 4.55, SE 0.09; mean difference 0.64, SE 0.08, P<.001). Adding text and visualization, in particular, reduced the decline in patient health engagement in participants who received normal results or mixed results (ie, combination of normal and abnormal results). CONCLUSIONS: Adding text and visualization features can attenuate the decrease in patient health engagement in participants who receive outcomes of a blood test via a patient portal, particularly when blood test results are (partly) normal. This suggests that explanatory text and visualization can be reassuring. Future research is warranted to determine whether these results can be generalized to a patient population who receive their actual blood test results.

Does shared decision-making reduce antibiotic prescribing in primary care?

Background: Increasing antibiotic resistance is recognized as a major threat to global health and is related to antibiotic prescription rates in primary care. Shared decision-making (SDM), the process in which patients and doctors participate together in making decisions, is argued to possibly promote more appropriate use of antibiotics and reduce prescribing. However, it is unknown whether in practice fewer antibiotics are prescribed where more SDM takes place. Objectives: To investigate whether more SDM is related to less antibiotic prescribing and whether this relationship differs between subgroups of patients (male/female and age groups). Patients and methods: A questionnaire survey was conducted among 2670 members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel to measure SDM (response rate 45%). Average practice-level SDM scores were calculated for 15 general practices. Data from routine electronic health records of 8192 adult patients of these general practices participating in the Nivel Primary Care Database were used to assess relevant illness episodes (acute cough, acute rhinosinusitis and urinary tract infection), the indication for antibiotics and antibiotic prescriptions. Logistic multilevel regression analyses were performed to investigate the relationship between practice-level SDM and patient-level antibiotic prescriptions. Results: In practices where more SDM takes place, general practitioners prescribed fewer antibiotics for adult patients under the age of 40 years in preference-sensitive situations (i.e. situations in which antibiotics could be considered according to clinical guidelines). Conclusions: SDM can be a framework to reduce the prescribing of antibiotics and thus to control antibiotic resistance.

Health literacy and primary health care use of ethnic minorities in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, ethnic minority populations visit their general practitioner (GP) more often than the indigenous population. An explanation for this association is lacking. Recently, health literacy is suggested as a possible explaining mechanism. Internationally, associations between health literacy and health care use, and between ethnicity and health literacy have been studied separately, but, so far, have not been linked to each other. In the Netherlands, some expectations have been expressed with regard to supposed low health literacy of ethnic minority groups, however, no empirical study has been done so far. The objectives of this study are therefore to acquire insight into the level of health literacy of ethnic minorities in the Netherlands and to examine whether the relationship between ethnicity and health care use can be (partly) explained by health literacy. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to a sample of 2.116 members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (response rate 46%, 89 respondents of non-western origin). Health literacy was measured with the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) which covers nine different domains. The health literacy levels of ethnic minority groups were compared to the indigenous population. A negative binomial regression model was used to estimate the association between ethnicity and GP visits. To examine whether health literacy is an explaining factor in this association, health literacy and interaction terms of health literacy and ethnicity were added into the model. RESULTS: Differences in levels of health literacy were only found between the Turkish population and the indigenous Dutch population. This study also found an association between ethnicity and GP visits. Ethnic minorities visit their GP 33% more often than the indigenous population. Three domains of the HLQ (the ability to navigate the health care system, the ability to find information and to read and understand health information) partly explained the association between ethnicity and GP visits. CONCLUSIONS: In general, there are no differences in health literacy between most of the ethnic minority groups in the Netherlands and the indigenous Dutch population. Only the Turkish population scored significantly lower on several health literacy domains. Some domains of health literacy do explain the association between ethnicity and higher frequency of GP visits. Further research is recommended to understand the pathways through which health literacy impacts health care use.

Do social norms play a role in explaining involvement in medical decision-making?

BACKGROUND: Patients' involvement in medical decision-making is crucial to provide good quality of care that is respectful of, and responsive to, patients' preferences, needs and values. Whether people want to be involved in medical decision-making is associated with individual patient characteristics, and health status. However, the observation of differences in whether people want to be involved does not in itself provide an explanation. Insight is necessary into mechanisms that explain people's involvement. This study aims to examine one mechanism, namely social norms. We make a distinction between subjective norms, that is doing what others think one ought to do, and descriptive norms, doing what others do. We focus on self-reported involvement in medical decision-making. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel in May 2015 (response 46%; N = 974). A regression model was used to estimate the relationship between socio-demographics, social norms and involvement in medical decision-making. RESULTS: In line with our hypotheses, we observed that the more conservative social norms are, the less people are involved in medical decision-making. The effects for both types of norms were comparable. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that social norms play a role as a mechanism to explain involvement in medical decision-making. Our study offers a first insight into the possibility that the decision to be involved in medical decision-making is not as individual as it at first seems; someone's social context also plays a role. Strategies aimed at emphasizing patient involvement have to address this social context.

Social support plays a role in the attitude that people have towards taking an active role in medical decision-making.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing emphasis towards including patients in medical decision-making. However, not all patients are actively involved in such decisions. Research has so far focused mainly on the influence of patient characteristics on preferences for active involvement. However, it can be argued that a patient's social context has to be taken into account as well, because social norms and resources affect behaviour. This study aims to examine the role of social resources, in the form of the availability of informational and emotional support, on the attitude towards taking an active role in medical decision-making. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (response 70 %; n = 1300) in June 2013. A regression model was then used to estimate the relation between medical and lay informational support and emotional support and the attitude towards taking an active role in medical decision-making. RESULTS: Availability of emotional support is positively related to the attitude towards taking an active role in medical decision-making only in people with a low level of education, not in persons with a middle and high level of education. The latter have a more positive attitude towards taking an active role in medical decision-making, irrespective of the level of emotional support available. People with better access to medical informational support have a more positive attitude towards taking an active role in medical decision-making; but no significant association was found for lay informational support. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that social resources are associated with the attitude towards taking an active role in medical decision-making. Strategies aimed at increasing patient involvement have to address this.

Determinants of the intention to use e-Health by community dwelling older people.

BACKGROUND: In the future, an increasing number of elderly people will be asked to accept care delivered through the Internet. For example, health-care professionals can provide treatment or support via telecare. But do elderly people intend to use such so-called e-Health applications? The objective of this study is to gain insight into the intention of older people, i.e. the elderly of the future, to use e-Health applications. Using elements of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), we hypothesized that their intention is related to the belief that e-Health will help (performance expectancy), the perceived ease of use (effort expectancy), the beliefs of important others (social influence), and the self-efficacy concerning Internet usage. METHODS: A pre-structured questionnaire was completed by 1014 people aged between 57 and 77 (response 67%). The hypothesized relationships were tested using nested linear regression analyses. RESULTS: If offered an e-Health application in the future, 63.1% of the respondents would definitely or probably use it. In general, people with a lower level of education had less intention of using e-Health. The majority of respondents perceived e-Health as easy to use (60.8%) and easy to learn (68.4%), items that constitute the scale for effort expectancy. Items in the performance expectancy scale generally scored lower: 45.8% perceived e-Health as useful and 38.2% perceived it as a pleasant way to interact. The tested model showed that expected performance and effort were highly related to intention to use e-Health. In addition, self-efficacy was related to intention to use while social influence was not. CONCLUSIONS: Acceptance of e-Health can be increased by informing people about the potential benefits of e-Health and letting them practice with the application. Special attention should be paid to people with less education and people who have not used the Internet before.

Patient activation and health literacy as predictors of health information use in a general sample of Dutch health care consumers.

In demand-led health care systems, consumers are expected to play an informed, active role in health care decisions by making use of health information. The ability to seek and use this information depends on specific knowledge, skills, and self-confidence. In this study, the authors validated a translated instrument to measure patient activation (Dutch PAM-13) in a general sample of Dutch health care consumers. Furthermore, the authors examined the relative contribution of patient activation and functional health literacy to the seeking and use of health information in The Netherlands. The mean patient activation score in the Dutch sample was higher for younger health care consumers and for those with a higher education, higher income, and better self-reported general and mental health status. More activated consumers were more likely to seek and use health information. Patient activation proved to be a stronger predictor for seeking and using health information than functional health literacy.

Should Commercial Diagnostic Testing Be Stimulated or Discouraged? Analyzing Willingness-to-Pay and Market Externalities of Three Commercial Diagnostic Tests in The Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: Consumers may purchase commercial diagnostic tests (CDT) without prior doctor consultation. This paper analyzes three CDT markets-commercial cholesterol tests (CCT), direct-to-consumer genetic health tests (DGT) and total body scans (TBS)-in the context of the universal, collectively financed health care system of the Netherlands. METHODS: An online willingness-to-pay (WTP) questionnaire was sent to a representative sample of 1500 Dutch consumers. Using contingent valuation (CV) methodology, an array of bids for three self-tests were presented to the respondents. The results were extrapolated to the Dutch population and compared to current prices and follow-up medical utilization, allowing analysis from a societal perspective. RESULTS: Overall, 880 of 1500 respondents completed the questionnaire (response rate 59%). Of the respondents, 26-44% were willing to pay a positive amount for the CDT. Willingness-to-pay was correlated to age and household income, but not to health status or prior experience with these tests. At mean current prices of €29 for CCT, €229 for DGT and €1,650 for TBS, 3.3%, 2.5%, and 1.1%, were willing to purchase a CCT, DGT, and TBS, respectively. All three CDT resulted in net costs to the health system, estimated at €5, €16, and €44 per test, respectively. Reducing volumes by 90,000 CCTs (19%), 19,000 DGTs (5%) and 4,000 TBSs (2.5%) in 2019 would optimize welfare. CONCLUSION: Most respondents were unwilling to consume CDT at any price or only if the CDT were provided for free. However, for a small group of consumers, societal costs exceed private benefits. Therefore, CDT regulation could provide small welfare gains.

Social context matters: The role of social support and social norms in support for solidarity in healthcare financing.

In many European countries, including the Netherlands, the healthcare system is financed according to the principles of solidarity. It is important, therefore, that public support for solidarity in healthcare financing is sufficient in order to ensure that people remain willing to contribute towards solidarity-based systems. The high willingness to contribute to the healthcare costs of others in the Netherlands suggests that support is generally high. However, there are differences between groups. Previous research has focused on mechanisms at the individual and institutional level to explain these differences. However, people's social context may also play a role. Little research has been conducted into this. To fill this gap, we examined the role of perceived social support and social norms in order to explain differences in the willingness to contribute to other people's healthcare costs. In November 2021, we conducted a survey study in which a questionnaire was sent to a representative sample of 1,500 members of the Dutch Healthcare Consumer Panel. This was returned by 837 panel members (56% response rate). Using logistic regression analysis, we showed that people who perceive higher levels of social support are more willing to contribute to the healthcare costs of others. We also found that the willingness to contribute is higher when someone's social context is more supportive of healthcare systems that are financed according to the principles of solidarity. This effect does not differ between people who perceive low and high levels of social support. Our results suggest that, next to the individual and institutional level, the social context of people has to be taken into consideration in policy and research addressing support for solidarity in healthcare financing.

Has public support for solidarity in healthcare financing in the Netherlands changed over time? A repeated cross-sectional study.

It is argued that solidarity-based healthcare systems are under pressure and that public support is decreasing. It can, therefore, be expected that support for solidarity in healthcare financing has diminished over time. However, little research has been conducted into this. To fill this gap, we used survey data from 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019, and 2021 to examine changes in public support for solidarity in healthcare financing in the Netherlands over time. This was operationalised as the own willingness and the expected willingness of others to contribute to other people's healthcare costs. Using logistic regression analysis, we found that the own willingness to contribute has slightly increased among the general population over time, although this was not observed in all subgroups. No change in the expected willingness of others to contribute was observed. Our results suggest that the willingness to contribute to other people's healthcare costs has, at least, not decreased over time. A majority of the Dutch population remains willing to share the burden of healthcare costs, indicating support for the principles of the solidarity-based healthcare system. However, not all people are willing to contribute to the healthcare costs of others. In addition, we do not know how much people want to pay. Further research into these topics is necessary.

How is enrollees' trust in health insurers associated with choosing health insurance?

In a healthcare system based on managed competition, health insurers are intended to be the prudent buyers of care on behalf of their enrollees. Equally, citizens are expected to be critical consumers when choosing a health insurance policy. The choice of a health insurance policy may be related to trust in the health insurer, as enrollees must believe that the health insurer will make the right choices for them when it comes to purchasing care. This study aims to investigate how enrollees' trust in health insurers is associated with their choice of a health insurance policy in the Netherlands. We will focus on the switching behaviour of enrollees and the choice of a policy with restrictive conditions. In February 2022, a questionnaire was sent to a representative sample regarding gender and age of the adult Dutch population. In total 1,125 enrollees responded, a response rate of 56%. Respondents were asked about the choices they made in choosing health insurance. Trust in health insurers was measured using the Health Insurer Trust Scale (HITS), a validated multiple item scale. Descriptive statistics, a paired t-test and logistic regression models were conducted to analyse the results. Of all respondents, 35% indicated that they agree, or completely agree, with the statement that they trust health insurers completely. In addition, trust in enrollees' own insurer is slightly higher than trust in other insurers (36.29 vs. 33.59, p<0.001). Furthermore, we found no significant associations between trust in health insurers, and whether enrollees have either switched health insurers or have chosen a policy with restrictive conditions. This study showed that enrollees' trust in health insurance in the Netherlands is relatively low and that trust in their own insurer is slightly higher than trust in other insurers. Furthermore, this study does not show a relationship between trust in health insurers and, either switching health insurers, or choosing a policy with restrictive conditions. Nevertheless, attention for increasing the trust in health insurers might still be important, as low trust may have negative consequences for other elements of the functioning of the healthcare system.

Measures to improve patient needs assessments and reduce practice variation in Dutch home care organizations.

AIM: Worldwide, long-term care tends to shift from institutional care towards home care. In order to deliver high-quality and adequate care, the type, amount and cost of care is determined by a patient needs assessment. However, there are indications that this patient needs assessment varies between comparable patients. In the Netherlands, some home care organizations aim to improve patient needs assessments by implementing improvement measures to reduce this practice variation. The goal of this study was to explore the type and perceived impact of those implemented improvement measures. DESIGN: A cross-sectional explorative survey study was conducted among Dutch home care organizations between January and April 2021. METHODS: An online questionnaire with 26 items was developed by the research team, which was distributed through Dutch nationwide home care sector organizations, the Dutch nurses' association (V&VN) and the Dutch society for home care nursing (NWG). RESULTS: The survey was completed by 184 respondents, including home care nurses, managers and staff who are responsible for training, policy and quality of care. Intervision and peer review for home care nurses were the most common reported improvement measures that were implemented in home care organizations. The experiences of those improvement measures have been perceived as creating greater uniformity in the patient needs assessment, making home care nurses feel more supported and secure performing their patient needs assessment and that the provided care is more in line with patients' demand. Our findings give insights into type and perceived impact of improvement measures that Dutch home care organizations implemented. Further research is needed to find out whether improvement measures actually improve patient needs assessments and reduce practice variation.

The impact of trust in healthcare and medication, and beliefs about medication on medication adherence in a Dutch medication-using population.

INTRODUCTION: Trust in healthcare and medication, defined as feelings of reassurance and confidence in the healthcare system or medication, may be a key prerequisite before engaging in the use of medication. However, earlier studies have focussed on beliefs about medication rather than trust as predictors of medication adherence. This study therefore aims to simultaneously explore the relationship of trust in healthcare, medication and beliefs about medication, with medication adherence. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, an online questionnaire was sent out to 1500 members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel of Nivel in November 2018. Respondents were asked to grade their level of trust in healthcare and medication (scale 1-10). The Beliefs About Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ) for general and specific medication beliefs was used to address beliefs, the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) to measure medication adherence. Data were analysed using structural equation modelling (SEM) with a backward stepwise approach. Out of 753 people that completed the questionnaire, 407 people used prescription medication and were included in the analyses. RESULTS: A positive association between trust in medication and medication adherence was found (0.044, p < 0.05). BMQ subscales Overuse (-0.083, p < 0.05), Necessity (0.075, p < 0.05) and Concerns (-0.134, p < 0.01) related with medication adherence. BMQ subscale Harm did not relate to medication adherence. CONCLUSION: Trust in medication and beliefs about medication were both individually associated with medication adherence. Healthcare providers should therefore not only focus on patients' medication beliefs, but also on strengthening patients' trust in medication to improve medication adherence.