Characterizing attributes of innovation of technologies for healthcare: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Characterizing and evaluating the holistic value of innovative healthcare technologies (e.g. treatments, services) constitutes a crucial goal to maximize limited resources. However, the characteristics of innovation have not been well identified. This review aims to describe the characteristics of healthcare innovation. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive systematic search using PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and Econlit from inception to July 2022. Articles were included if they described innovation or the characteristics of innovation of the technologies in healthcare. Characteristics or definitions of innovation directly or indirectly described as innovation were extracted from the included articles. Two independent reviewers then conceptualized the identified characteristics of innovation to generate innovation attributes in healthcare. RESULTS: In total, 103 articles were included in this review. Eight attributes describing innovation, i.e. novelty, step change, substantial benefits, an improvement over existing technologies, convenience and/or adherence, added value, acceptable cost, and uncounted benefits, were conceptualized. Most of the identified innovation attributes were based on the researchers' perspective. CONCLUSIONS: This study conceptualized innovation attributes in healthcare based on the characteristics of healthcare innovation as defined in the literature. Further research is warranted to obtain a complete understanding of the perspectives of researchers and other stakeholders, including patients, healthcare providers, healthcare payers, and the pharmaceutical industry, on recognizing innovation in healthcare.KEY POINTSThis is the first systematic review to conceptualize attributes of healthcare innovation.We conceptualized eight attributes describing innovation, i.e. novelty, step change, substantial benefits, an improvement over existing technologies, convenience and/or adherence, added value, acceptable cost, and uncounted benefits based on the similar concept.In existing literature, patients' and caregivers' perspectives were less frequently found to describe the innovation attributes.Future research is needed to identify, measure, and value various stakeholders, including patients' and caregivers' perspectives on healthcare innovation.

Consumer Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Nutraceuticals: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVES: Globally, nutraceuticals have been increasingly used. Nevertheless, the consumer preferences for nutraceuticals have not been quantitatively investigated. This study used discrete choice experiment (DCE) to examine consumer preferences and willingness to pay for nutraceuticals. METHODS: Four attributes (ie, the scientific proof of effectiveness, the scientific proof of safety, the source of recommendation, and cost) were identified from a systematic review and focus group interviews. They were used to develop a DCE questionnaire. Consumers at community pharmacies in Malaysia were asked to respond to 8 DCE choice sets. A conditional logit model was employed to obtain the relative importance of each attribute and to estimate respondents' WTP for nutraceuticals. RESULTS: A total of 111 valid responses were analyzed. A negative constant term in the developed model indicated that generally the respondents preferred not to use nutraceuticals before they considered the study attributes. The respondents preferred nutraceuticals with no side effect, clear evidence of effectiveness, and recommendation of a healthcare professional. The respondents were willing to pay $252/month more for nutraceuticals proven with no side effect than for those without proof of safety, and $102/month more for nutraceuticals proven with clear effectiveness than for those without proof of effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Consumers weighed relatively high on the availability of safety and effectiveness proofs when they chose nutraceuticals. The study highlights on the crucial need to inform consumers using clinical evidences of nutraceuticals as the information is highly preferred by consumers.

Estimating the preferences and willingness-to-pay for colorectal cancer screening: an opportunity to incorporate the perspective of population at risk into policy development in Thailand.

AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the public health burdens that can be lowered by early detection. This study aims to examine the preferences and willingness-to-pay of a population at risk for CRC screening in Thailand. Understanding the preferences for these individuals at risk would help Thailand, as an example of LMICs, to design effective population-based CRC screening programs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted among screening-naïve adults aged 50-75 years, who were at risk of CRC, in the out-patient department of a tertiary care hospital in Thailand. A DCE questionnaire was developed from six CRC screening attributes. Each questionnaire was composed of six choice sets and each contained two alternatives described by the different levels of attributes and an opt-out alternative. Participants were asked to choose one alternative from each choice set. A multinomial logit model was developed to determine the relative preference of each attribute. The willingness-to-pays for all attributes and screening modalities and the estimated preferred choices of the annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT), 10-yearly colonoscopy, 5-yearly double-contrast barium enema (DCBE), 5-yearly computed tomographic colonography (CTC), 5-yearly flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), and no screening was calculated and compared. RESULTS: Four hundred participants were included. All attributes, except pain and less bowel preparation, were statistically associated with the participants' preference (p < .05). They preferred screenings with a high-risk reduction of CRC-related mortality, no complication, 5-year interval, and lower cost. The estimated preferred choices of FIT, colonoscopy, DCBE, CTC, and FS were 38.2%, 11.4%, 14.6%, 9.2%, and 11.4%, respectively. The willingness-to-pays for each screening modality was US$251, US$189, US$183, US$154, and US$142 (8,107, 6,105, 5,911, 4,974, and 4,587 THB) per episode, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The risk reduction of CRC-related mortality, complication, screening interval, and cost influenced the CRC screening preferences of Thai adults. FIT was the most preferred. Policymakers can develop a successful CRC screening campaign using these findings, incorporating the perspective of the population at risk in policy formulation to accomplish their goals.

Factors affecting consumers' decisions on the use of nutraceuticals: a systematic review.

There is a high and increasing global prevalence of nutraceuticals use. This study aims to systematically review and critically appraise all available evidence to identify the factors affecting consumers' decisions in taking nutraceuticals. Questionnaire, interview or focus group studies which directly reported factors affecting consumers' decisions in using nutraceuticals were included. A thematic synthesis method was employed to synthesis the findings from the included studies. Out of the 76 studies included, the key factors identified as the most important factors motivating consumers to take nutraceuticals were the perceived health benefits and safety of nutraceuticals, as well as the advice from healthcare professionals, friends and family. The identified barriers to take nutraceuticals were a lack of belief in the health benefit of nutraceuticals, the high cost of nutraceuticals and consumers' lack of knowledge about nutraceuticals. As a chief course of recommendation for the use of nutraceuticals, healthcare professionals should strive to utilise reliable information from clinical evidence to help consumers in making an informed decision in using nutraceuticals. Future studies should explore the possible ways to improve channelling clinical evidence information of nutraceuticals to the public.

Evaluating the use of appropriate anticoagulation with lenalidomide and pomalidomide in patients with multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Lenalidomide and pomalidomide are two immunomodulatory medications with the potential to improve outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma; however, a black box warning for venous thromboembolism exists. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess overall adherence to guideline recommendations for anticoagulation therapy with lenalidomide and pomalidomide in multiple myeloma patients. METHODS: This retrospective study at an ambulatory oncology clinic utilized chart reviews from the calendar years 2013-2016. The primary endpoint was prescription of appropriate anticoagulation upon initiation of therapy based on a list of predetermined risk factors. Secondary endpoints included incidence of deep venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, and major bleed; initial anticoagulant prescribed; and whether or not anticoagulation was prescribed for another disease state. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients met inclusion criteria: 70.8% (n = 92) and 29.2% (n = 38) were prescribed lenalidomide and pomalidomide, respectively. A total risk score of two was most common (n = 54, 41.5%). Aspirin 81 mg oral tablet was prescribed most often (n = 53, 40.8%), followed by no anticoagulation (n = 30, 23.1%). Overall, 27 patients (20.8%) were prescribed anticoagulation in accordance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Incidence of deep venous thromboembolism was the most common adverse event (n = 4, 3.1%), followed by major bleed (n = 1, 0.8%). No reports of pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, or stroke were documented. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, a disparity exists between appropriate prescribing of prophylactic anticoagulation and current practice guidelines. However, documentation of thromboembolic events was lower than recorded in previously published literature.

Determinants of hospital loss in Thailand: experience from the first year of a universal coverage health insurance program.

The objective of this study was to examine determinants of hospital loss in Thailand. Administration national data for 640 public hospitals of fiscal year 2002 from Ministry of Public Health were analyzed. Results showed that various managerial, service mix, and market variables were significantly associated with the likelihood of the hospital being unprofitable. Hospital characteristics were associated with the amount of loss. The results also suggested that managing the number of hospital employees, inventory, and patient hospitalization could control the amount of loss. In conclusion, most of identified factors associated with hospital loss were manageable. The ramification of this study was to help policy makers understand the hospital loss situation in Thailand after implementing the UC scheme and design policy to resolve the hospital loss problems.