Understanding Australian pharmacy degree holders' job preferences through the lens of motivation-hygiene theory.

Increasing the contribution of pharmacists to primary care has been long discussed, particularly in the context of health workforce shortages and the push to better integrate all providers across primary care. This study examines the employment preferences of Australian pharmacy degree holders (PDHs) elicited through a discrete choice experiment (DCE), to better understand the drivers of current labour force choices. A labelled DCE was developed incorporating the six employment sectors: hospital pharmacy, community pharmacy, primary healthcare settings, pharmaceutical industry, government/academia, and non-pharmacy-related sector. Each alternative was described by five attributes using Herzberg's Two Factor Theory as a conceptual framework. They include motivators - role and career opportunities, and hygiene factors-flexible work schedule, geographic location, and salary. Unforced choice data were analysed using conditional logit and mixed logit models. Based on a sample of 678 PDHs in Australia, our findings indicated pharmaceutical industry is the least preferred sector, followed by non-pharmacy-related sector. Motivators in the form of role and career opportunities are the most important attributes in hospital pharmacy while hygiene factors - geographic location and salary significantly drive the choice of community pharmacy and primary care settings. We provided evidence of a willingness to adopt expanded roles in community pharmacy. This unique interpretation of the key drivers of employment preference in light of motivators and hygiene factors provides policy makers with important information when designing policies to attract and retain PDHs across employment sectors.

Medication-related problems identified by community pharmacists: a descriptive case study of two Australian populations.

BACKGROUND: Medication-related problems (MRPs) contribute significantly to preventable patient harm and global healthcare expenditure. Vulnerable populations, including Indigenous Australians (please note that the use of the term 'Indigenous' in this paper includes all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and acknowledges their rich traditions and heterogenous cultures.) and people living with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI), may be at increased risk of MRPs. Pharmacist-led medication reviews can identify MRPs for targeted action. OBJECTIVE: To characterize MRPs identified and recommendations made by community pharmacists during medication reviews conducted with Indigenous Australians and people living with SPMI. METHODS: Participants were recruited through two Australian trials testing the feasibility and/or effectiveness of novel community pharmacist-led interventions, the Indigenous Medication Review Service (IMeRSe) feasibility study (June 2018-July 2019) and Bridging the Gap between Physical and Mental Illness in Community Pharmacy (PharMIbridge) randomized controlled trial (September 2020-December 2021). Trained community pharmacists conducted medication reviews responsive to the cultural and health needs of participants. MRPs, MRP severity and pharmacist recommendations were documented and classified using an established classification system (DOCUMENT). MRP severity was assessed by pharmacists and an independent assessor. Data were analysed descriptively, and paired t-tests were used to compare severity ratings. RESULTS: Pharmacists identified 795 MRPs with 411 participants across both trials (n = 255 IMeRSe, n = 156 PharMIbridge). Non-adherence to medication was the most common (n = 157, 25.1%) and second-most common (n = 25, 14.7%) MRP in IMeRSe and PharMIbridge, respectively. Undertreatment was the second-most common MRP in the sample of Indigenous Australians (n = 139, 22.2%), and reports of toxicity/adverse reactions were most common in people living with SPMI (n = 41, 24.1%). A change in pharmacotherapy was the most frequent recommendation made by pharmacists (40.2% and 55.0% in IMeRSe and PharMIbridge, respectively). Severity ratings varied, with the majority being 'Mild' or 'Moderate' in both groups. Significant differences were found in the severity rating assigned by trial pharmacists and the independent assessor. CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacists identified a range of MRPs experienced by two at-risk populations, most commonly non-adherence and toxicity or adverse reactions, when conducting medication reviews and proposed diverse strategies to manage these, frequently recommending a change in pharmacotherapy. These findings highlight the opportunity for more targeted approaches to identifying and managing MRPs in primary care and tailored community pharmacist-led interventions may be of value in this space. TRAIL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry records (IMeRSe ACTRN12618000188235 registered 06/02/2018 & PharMIbridge ACTRN12620000577910 registered 18/05/2020).

Activating pharmacists to reduce the frequency of medication-related problems (ACTMed): a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Medicines are the most frequent health care intervention type; their safe use provides significant benefits, but inappropriate use can cause harm. Systemic primary care approaches can manage serious medication-related problems in a timely manner. OBJECTIVES: ACTMed (ACTivating primary care for MEDicine safety) uses information technology and financial incentives to encourage pharmacists to work more closely with general practitioners to reduce the risk of harm, improve patients' experience of care, streamline workflows, and increase the efficiency of medical care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The stepped wedge cluster randomised trial in 42 Queensland primary care practices will assess the effectiveness of the ACTMed intervention. The primary outcome will be the proportion of people at risk of serious medication-related problems - patients with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, or asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - who experience such problems. We will also estimate the cost per averted serious medication-related problem and the cost per averted potentially preventable medication-related hospitalisation. ETHICS APPROVAL: The University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee approved the pilot (2021/HE002189) and trial phases of the ACTMed study (2022/HE002136). Access to Patron data was granted by the Patron Data Governance Committee (PAT052ACTMed). Access to linked hospitalisations and deaths data are subject to Public Health Act approval (pending). DISSEMINATION OF FINDINGS: A comprehensive dissemination plan will be co-developed by the researchers, the ACTMed steering committee and consumer advisory group, project partners, and trial site representatives. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities will be supported in leading community-level dissemination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (pilot: ACTRN12622000595718; 21 April 2022; full trial: ACTRN12622000574741; 14 April 2022).

Comparison of a full and partial choice set design in a labeled discrete choice experiment.

Labeled discrete choice experiments (DCEs) commonly present all alternatives using a full choice set design (FCSD), which could impose a high cognitive burden on respondents. In the setting of employment preferences, this study explored if a partial choice set design (PCSD) reduced cognitive burden whilst maintaining convergent validity compared with a FCSD. Respondents' preferences between the two designs were investigated. In the experimental design, labeled utility functions were rewritten into a single generic utility function using label dummy variables to generate an efficient PCSD with 3 alternatives shown in each choice task (out of 6). The DCE was embedded in a nationwide survey of 790 Australian pharmacy degree holders where respondents were presented with both a block of FCSD and PCSD tasks in random order. The PCSD's impact on error variances was investigated using a heteroscedastic conditional logit model. The convergent validity of PCSD was based on the equality of willingness-to-forgo-expected-salary estimates from Willingness-to-pay-space mixed logit models. A nested logit model was used combined with respondents' qualitative responses to understand respondents' design preferences. We show a promising future use of PCSD by providing evidence that PCSD can reduce cognitive burden while satisfying convergent validity compared to FCSD.

Role of Indigenous health workers in the delivery of comprehensive primary health care in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to identify and describe Indigenous health workers' roles, functions, activities, and involvement in decision-making in the provision of primary health care for Indigenous peoples and communities in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. INTRODUCTION: The Indigenous health worker workforce is the cornerstone to providing culturally safe, primary health care for Indigenous peoples and communities. Yet, wide-ranging role variation has created a general lack of understanding of who Indigenous health workers are, what Indigenous health workers do, and how to best coordinate their roles and skills with other care providers to further improve the health care experience and outcomes for Indigenous peoples and communities. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider full text, peer-reviewed publications and gray literature that include Indigenous health workers who identify as belonging to, and are recognized as such by their communities, any First Peoples group in Canada (First Nations, Inuit, Métis), Australia (Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander), and New Zealand (Maori); and who describe their role as the provision of primary health care to Indigenous peoples and communities, in clinical and non-clinical settings, in both mainstream health systems and within community-controlled primary health care sectors. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Informit (Indigenous Collection, New Zealand Collection, Rural and Remote Health Database, APAIS-ATSIS, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health bibliography), Sociological Abstracts, and Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet will be searched for studies. Additional sources of unpublished literature, including government websites and community-controlled health organization websites in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, will also be searched. Articles in English and French will be included, with no set date restrictions. Screening and selection will follow JBI methodology and findings will be summarized in tabular form accompanied by narrative text.

Risky business, healthy lives: how risk perception, risk preferences and information influence consumer's risky health choices.

Consumer's understanding of health risks is a key determinant of effective risk communication about health care options. Individuals make decisions about their health under uncertainty, yet the influence of risk perception, risk preferences and information processing has not been well researched in the health economics literature. Here, a novel extension of the standard discrete choice experiment framework is developed to investigate the effect of a "risk shock" (the difference between an individual's perceived risk and updated information) on consumption and health care decisions. In the experiment, consumers were asked to evaluate a basket of health service and lifestyle choices to lower cardiovascular risk. While most individuals, on average, aim to lower their CVD risk to a level of 1.37% points below the updated information provided, the response was asymmetrical, whereby the response to a "negative shock" was less than a "positive shock". Furthermore, we find evidence that risk perception, rather than risk preferences, are more likely to affect consumer health and behaviour changes. Given the global pandemic of CVD, these findings suggest there are public health gains to be made from personalised risk communication if it is better tailored to account for individuals' preferences and risk perception.

Provision of home medicines reviews in Australia: linking population need with service provision and available pharmacist workforce.

Objective Identifying and quantifying the health needs of a population are the basis of evidence-based health policy and workforce planning. The motivation for undertaking the present study was to evaluate whether the current level of medication review services corresponds to population need, as proxied by the rate of polypharmacy, and to undertake a preliminary analysis of the sufficiency of the current workforce. This paper: (1) estimates the age- and sex-standardised rates of polypharmacy as a proxy for population need for home medicines review; (2) compares the rate of polypharmacy with current service provision of home medicines reviews; and (3) links the estimated need for services with the current number and location of pharmacist providers. Methods Age- and sex-adjusted polypharmacy rates, by state, were estimated from the National Health Survey of Australia (2017-18), service levels were estimated from national-level administrative claims data (2017-18) and the current workforce was estimated from the Australian Association of Consultant Pharmacists (2018). The current level of service provision was compared to the estimated population need for services, alongside the size of the pharmacy workforce required if need was met. Results The adjusted rate of polypharmacy in Australia, using the strictest definition of ≥10 medications and ≥3 current chronic illnesses, was 1389 per 100000 population. The illustrative needs-based analysis suggests that there may be a disconnect between the current level of service provision and population health needs. Conclusion Given that polypharmacy is a risk factor for medication-related problems, and that medication review is one of the few targeted strategies currently available to address medication-related problems in the population, service provision may be inadequate. Policy options to improve service provision could include interventions to increase workforce productivity and relaxing the current eligibility criteria for review, especially in rural and remote areas. What is known about the topic? Polypharmacy is a risk factor for medication-related problems, which can cause increased morbidity and mortality in the population. What does this paper add? This paper provides representative, population-based rates of polypharmacy in Australia and uses these rates in a needs-based analysis of service provision and workforce adequacy to provide home medicines review services. What are the implications for practitioners? Several policy options are available for consideration, including interventions to increase workforce productivity and relaxation of the current eligibility criteria for medicines review, especially in rural and remote areas.

Does policy change to allow pharmacist provision of influenza vaccination increase population uptake? A systematic review.

Objective The aims of this study were to estimate the effect of pharmacists' vaccinating for influenza on overall vaccination rates and to assess whether any effect differs for at-risk subgroups compared with the general population. Methods A systematic review was undertaken, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases were searched during July 2019 and included Medline (Ovid), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Scopus and the Cochrane Library. Results The largest difference reported in overall population vaccination rates associated with pharmacists undertaking influenza vaccinations was an increase of 10%; the smallest showed no discernible effect. The effect was graduated: pharmacists with the most autonomy demonstrated the largest rate increases. There was evidence of substitution by pharmacists, but the effect size was small. Conclusions The effect of allowing pharmacists to administer influenza vaccinations appears positive, but small. Given that pharmacists are likely to provide vaccinations at a lower cost than doctors, there may be cost-savings to the health system and consumers. Future research may include evaluating pharmacist-provided vaccinations compared with (or in combination with) other strategies, such as advertising, to increase access and uptake across the range of providers, as well as ongoing research to address vaccine hesitancy. What is known about the topic? In Australia, and many other countries, community pharmacies provide an alternative and accessible option for influenza vaccination; however the effect on overall vaccination rates remains unclear. What does this paper add? This systematic review of the international literature suggests that pharmacist-provided vaccinations increase uptake; substitution of doctors by pharmacists may result in cost savings. What are the implications for practitioners? The findings of this study are important for health policy makers and health workforce researchers aiming to maximise population vaccination rates and workforce efficiency. In the absence of available Australian data, data from the international experience of legislating pharmacists to vaccinate against influenza are summarised and critiqued. Results can be used when determining the best health workforce and policy mix with regard to the vaccination workforce.

Adaptation of potentially preventable medication-related hospitalisation indicators for Indigenous populations in Australia using a modified Delphi technique.

OBJECTIVES: One of the outcomes of a medication review service is to identify and manage medication-related problems (MRPs). The most serious MRPs may result in hospitalisation, which could be preventable if appropriate processes of care were adopted. The aim of this study was to update and adapt a previously published set of clinical indicators for use in assessing the effectiveness of a medication review service tailored to meet the needs of Indigenous people, who experience some of the worst health outcomes of all Australians. DESIGN: A modified Delphi technique was used to: (i) identify additional indicators for consideration, (ii) assess whether the original indicators were relevant in the context of Indigenous health and (iii) reach consensus on a final set of indicators. Three rounds of rating were used via an anonymous online survey, with 70% agreement required for indicator inclusion. SETTING: The indicators were designed for use in Indigenous primary care in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen panellists participated including medical specialists, general practice doctors, pharmacists and epidemiologists experienced in working with Indigenous patients. RESULTS: Panellists rated 101 indicators (45 from the original set and 57 newly identified). Of these, 41 were accepted unchanged, seven were rejected and the remainder were either modified before acceptance or merged with other indicators. A final set of 81 indicators was agreed. Conclusions This study provides a set of clinical indicators to be used as a primary outcome measure for medication review services for Indigenous people in Australia and as a prompt for pharmacists and doctors conducting medication reviews. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The trial registration for the Indigenous Medication Review Service feasibility study is ACTRN12618000188235.

Protocol for a feasibility study of an Indigenous Medication Review Service (IMeRSe) in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: The age-adjusted rate of potentially preventable hospitalisations for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is almost five times the rate of other Australians. Quality use of medicines has an important role in alleviating these differences. This requires strengthening existing medication reviewing services through collaboration between community pharmacists and health workers, and ensuring services are culturally appropriate. This Indigenous Medication Review Service (IMeRSe) study aims to develop and evaluate the feasibility of a culturally appropriate medication management service delivered by community pharmacists in collaboration with Aboriginal health workers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will be conducted in nine Aboriginal health services (AHSs) and their associated community pharmacies in three Australian states over 12 months. Community pharmacists will be trained to improve their awareness and understanding of Indigenous health and cultural issues, to communicate the quality use of medicines effectively, and to strengthen interprofessional relationships with AHSs and their staff. Sixty consumers (with a chronic condition/pregnant/within 2 years post partum and at risk of medication-related problems (MRPs) per site will be recruited, with data collection at baseline and 6 months. The primary outcome is the difference in cumulative incidence of serious MRPs in the 6 months after IMeRSe introduction compared with the 6 months prior. Secondary outcomes include potentially preventable medication-related hospitalisations, medication adherence, total MRPs, psychological and social empowerment, beliefs about medication, treatment satisfaction and health expenditure. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol received approval from Griffith University (HREC/2018/251), Queensland Health Metro South (HREC/18/QPAH/109), Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council of New South Wales (1381/18), Far North Queensland (HREC/18/QCH/86-1256) and the Central Australian HREC (CA-18-3090). Dissemination to Indigenous people and communities will be a priority. Results will be available on the Australian Sixth Community Pharmacy Agreement website and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618000188235; Pre-results.

'You don't throw these things out:' an exploration of medicines retention and disposal practices in Australian homes.

BACKGROUND: Consumers most commonly discard unwanted medicines in household rubbish or drains, however, there are global concerns over the extent, environmental impact and health risks. When consumers procure or store medicines for future use, this can impact negatively on quality use of medicines and consumer safety. We sought greater insight into the extent of these practices by exploring the volume and types of medicines in Australian homes, and self-reported practices related to medicine accumulation, use and disposal. This qualitative study formed part of a larger project that included a general population survey on household medicine disposal practices. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews were undertaken with a subset of respondents (n = 166) from the survey. Participants were eligible if they were experienced medicine users, i.e. used five or more prescribed, over the counter, and/or complementary and alternative medicines. Participants were asked to collect and name all medicines in their household; further detail was obtained about medicines used only when required or no longer used, such as expiry dates and quantity remaining. The quantitative data on the number and type of medicines stored at home were analysed descriptively. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. RESULTS: A total of 2301 medicines were identified as 1424 medicines not in everyday use (unused, unwanted, expired or when required) in 166 households, and 877 regularly used medicines by 119 participants. Medicines were often stored in multiple locations, particularly kitchens. Although accidental ingestion in children and pets and decreased efficacy were recognised health risks, this did not always translate to appropriate storage, usage or disposal practices. Individual risk-benefit assessments were applied to decisions to retain, use or dispose of medicines, including expired medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate medicine storage, use, and/or disposal practices raises public health concerns, particularly as there is a free returned medicines scheme available, and that this particular participant group were considered experienced medicine users. Healthcare professionals must act to address consumer misconceptions around the quality use of medicines, including medicine retention, storage and disposal. Future research is warranted to explore consumer practices in this context and confirm these findings in a younger, or healthier population.

When is a medicine unwanted, how is it disposed, and how might safe disposal be promoted? Insights from the Australian population.

Objective The aim of the present study was to explore disposal practices of unwanted medicines in a representative sample of Australian adults, compare this with previous household waste surveys and explore awareness of the National Return and Disposal of Unwanted Medicines (RUM) Project. Methods A 10-min online survey was developed, piloted and conducted with an existing research panel of adult individuals. Survey questions recorded demographics, the presence of unwanted medicines in the home, medicine disposal practices and concerns about unwanted medicines. Descriptive statistical analyses and rank-ordered logit regression were conducted. Results Sixty per cent of 4302 respondents reported having unwanted medicines in their household. Medicines were primarily kept just in case they were needed again and one-third of these medicines were expired. Two-thirds of respondents disposed of medicines with the household garbage and approximately one-quarter poured medicines down the drain. Only 17.6% of respondents had heard of the RUM Project, although, once informed, 91.7% stated that they would use it. Respondents ranked the risk of unintended ingestion as the most important public health message for future social marketing campaigns. Conclusions Respondents were largely unaware of the RUM Project, yet were willing to use it once informed. Limited awareness could lead to environmental or public health risks, and targeted information campaigns are needed. What is known about the topic? There is a growing international evidence base on how people dispose of unwanted medicines and the negative consequences, particularly the environmental effects of inappropriate disposal. Although insight into variation in disposal methods is increasing, knowledge of how people perceive risks and awareness of inappropriate disposal methods is more limited. What does this paper add? This study provides evidence of inappropriate medicines disposal and potential stockpiling of medicines in Australian households that could contribute to environmental and/or public health risks. It also reveals possible trends towards a higher frequency of inappropriate disposal practices in the Australian context. Insights into respondents' perceptions of associated risks and awareness of a national scheme for appropriate disposal of medicines have not previously been reported. What are the implications for practitioners? The findings of the present study provide important insights for all health professionals as stakeholders in the quality use of medicines. It is important for those health professionals who assist consumers to manage their medicines to have strategies in place that routinely identify potential stockpiling and inform consumers about appropriate methods of medicines disposal. Although the findings of this study are specific to the Australian context, they may usefully inform policy, public health campaigns and the individual practices of health professionals and other stakeholders in promoting the quality use of medicines nationally and internationally.

Evaluation of the National Return of unwanted medicines (RUM) program in Australia: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The National Return of Unwanted Medicines (NatRUM) program in Australia is one of the few nationally coordinated, free-to-consumer schemes to dispose of unwanted medicines globally. This scheme has been in operation since 1996, however, little is known about public awareness of the scheme and its effectiveness in reducing unsafe disposal practices. The study objectives are to undertake a review of (1) the current use of the NatRUM scheme by consumers; and (11) to investigate disposal practices and beliefs of the general population. METHODS/DESIGN: A two-stage, mixed-methods study will be undertaken. Stage One will include a nation-wide audit of a representative sample of unwanted medicine bins, collected by community pharmacies, for incineration. The audit will detail the type and amount of unwanted medicines collected and if they are subsidised on the national formulary (Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme). Stage Two will include: (i) a large, representative, general population survey; and (ii) more detailed interviews with a sub-set of this sample, who take five or more medications. Results will quantitatively describe the awareness of the NatRUM scheme, disposal practices and the volume of unwanted medicines stored in the home. It will qualitatively describe beliefs and perceptions about storage and disposal practices. DISCUSSION: It is anticipated that this study will provide valuable insights about how Australians dispose of unwanted medicines, their awareness of the NatRUM scheme and how the scheme might be strengthened. Results will inform the Federal Department of Health and NatRUM Ltd. Board at a local level, as well as other countries who are yet to develop or implement coordinated disposal schemes. A number of challenges are expected, including ensuring the consistency of medicines terminology during the bin audit and recruiting a representative sample of Australians for the general population survey. Results of this study will be widely disseminated to support the translation of findings into practice.

Disruptive innovation in community pharmacy - Impact of automation on the pharmacist workforce.

Pharmacy workforce planning has been relatively static for many decades. However, like all industries, health care is exposed to potentially disruptive technological changes. Automated dispensing systems have been available to pharmacy for over a decade and have been applied to a range of repetitive technical processes which are at risk of error, including record keeping, item selection, labeling and dose packing. To date, most applications of this technology have been at the local level, such as hospital pharmacies or single-site community pharmacies. However, widespread implementation of a more centralized automated dispensing model, such as the 'hub and spoke' model currently being debated in the United Kingdom, could cause a 'technology shock,' delivering industry-wide efficiencies, improving medication accessibility and lowering costs to consumers and funding agencies. Some of pharmacists' historical roles may be made redundant, and new roles may be created, decoupling pharmacists to a certain extent from the dispensing and supply process. It may also create an additional opportunity for pharmacists to be acknowledged and renumerated for professional services that extend beyond the dispensary. Such a change would have significant implications for the organization and funding of community pharmacy services as well as pharmacy workforce planning. This paper discusses the prospect of centralized automated dispensing systems and how this may impact on the pharmacy workforce. It concludes that more work needs to be done in the realm of pharmacy workforce planning to ensure that the introduction of any new technology delivers optimal outcomes to consumers, insurers and the pharmacy workforce.

Patient and nurse preferences for implementation of bedside handover: Do they agree? Findings from a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare patients' and nurses' preferences for the implementation of bedside handover. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment describing handover choices using six characteristics: whether the patient is invited to participate; whether a family member/carer/friend is invited; the number of nurses present; the level of patient involvement; the information content; and privacy. SETTING: Two Australian hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients (n=401) and nurses (n=200) recruited from medical wards. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean importance scores for handover characteristics estimated using mixed multinomial logit regression of the choice data. RESULTS: Both patient and nurse participants preferred handover at the bedside rather than elsewhere (P<.05). Being invited to participate, supporting strong two-way communication, having a family member/carer/friend present and having two nurses rather than the nursing team present were most important for patients. Patients being invited to participate and supporting strong two-way communication were most important for nurses. However, contrary to patient preferences, having a family member/carer/friend present was not considered important by nurses. Further, while patients expressed a weak preference to have sensitive information handed over quietly at the bedside, nurses expressed a relatively strong preference for handover of sensitive information verbally away from the bedside. CONCLUSIONS: All participants strongly support handover at the bedside and want patients to participate although patient and nurse preferences for various aspects of bedside handover differ. An understanding of these preferences is expected to support recommendations for improving the patient hospital experience and the consistent implementation of bedside handover as a safety initiative.

Lost in the crowd? Using eye-tracking to investigate the effect of complexity on attribute non-attendance in discrete choice experiments.

BACKGROUND: The provision of additional information is often assumed to improve consumption decisions, allowing consumers to more accurately weigh the costs and benefits of alternatives. However, increasing the complexity of decision problems may prompt changes in information processing. This is particularly relevant for experimental methods such as discrete choice experiments (DCEs) where the researcher can manipulate the complexity of the decision problem. The primary aims of this study are (i) to test whether consumers actually process additional information in an already complex decision problem, and (ii) consider the implications of any such 'complexity-driven' changes in information processing for design and analysis of DCEs. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) is used to simulate a complex decision problem; here, the choice between complementary and conventional medicine for different health conditions. Eye-tracking technology is used to capture the number of times and the duration that a participant looks at any part of a computer screen during completion of DCE choice sets. From this we can analyse what has become known in the DCE literature as 'attribute non-attendance' (ANA). Using data from 32 participants, we model the likelihood of ANA as a function of choice set complexity and respondent characteristics using fixed and random effects models to account for repeated choice set completion. We also model whether participants are consistent with regard to which characteristics (attributes) they consider across choice sets. RESULTS: We find that complexity is the strongest predictor of ANA when other possible influences, such as time pressure, ordering effects, survey specific effects and socio-demographic variables (including proxies for prior experience with the decision problem) are considered. We also find that most participants do not apply a consistent information processing strategy across choice sets. CONCLUSIONS: Eye-tracking technology shows promise as a way of obtaining additional information from consumer research, improving DCE design, and informing the design of policy measures. With regards to DCE design, results from the present study suggest that eye-tracking data can identify the point at which adding complexity (and realism) to DCE choice scenarios becomes self-defeating due to unacceptable increases in ANA. Eye-tracking data therefore has clear application in the construction of guidelines for DCE design and during piloting of DCE choice scenarios. With regards to design of policy measures such as labelling requirements for CAM and conventional medicines, the provision of additional information has the potential to make difficult decisions even harder and may not have the desired effect on decision-making.

Consumer preferences for teledermoscopy screening to detect melanoma early.

INTRODUCTION: 'Store and forward' teledermoscopy is a technology with potential advantages for melanoma screening. Any large-scale implementation of this technology is dependent on consumer acceptance. AIM: To investigate preferences for melanoma screening options compared with skin self-examination in adults considered to be at increased risk of developing skin cancer. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was completed by 35 consumers, all of whom had prior experience with the use of teledermoscopy, in Queensland, Australia. Participants made 12 choices between screening alternatives described by seven attributes including monetary cost. A mixed logit model was used to estimate the relative weights that consumers place on different aspects of screening, along with the marginal willingness to pay for teledermoscopy as opposed to screening at a clinic. RESULTS: Overall, participants preferred screening/diagnosis by a health professional rather than skin self-examination. Key drivers of screening choice were for results to be reviewed by a dermatologist; a higher detection rate; fewer non-cancerous moles being removed in relation to every skin cancer detected; and less time spent away from usual activities. On average, participants were willing to pay AUD110 to have teledermoscopy with dermatologist review available to them as a screening option. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Consumers preferentially value aspects of care that are more feasible with a teledermoscopy screening model, as compared with other skin cancer screening and diagnosis options. This study adds to previous literature in the area which has relied on the use of consumer satisfaction scales to assess the acceptability of teledermoscopy.

Patient and nurse preferences for nurse handover-using preferences to inform policy: a discrete choice experiment protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Nursing bedside handover in hospital has been identified as an opportunity to involve patients and promote patient-centred care. It is important to consider the preferences of both patients and nurses when implementing bedside handover to maximise the successful uptake of this policy. We outline a study which aims to (1) identify, compare and contrast the preferences for various aspects of handover common to nurses and patients while accounting for other factors, such as the time constraints of nurses that may influence these preferences.; (2) identify opportunities for nurses to better involve patients in bedside handover and (3) identify patient and nurse preferences that may challenge the full implementation of bedside handover in the acute medical setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We outline the protocol for a discrete choice experiment (DCE) which uses a survey design common to both patients and nurses. We describe the qualitative and pilot work undertaken to design the DCE. We use a D-efficient design which is informed by prior coefficients collected during the pilot phase. We also discuss the face-to-face administration of this survey in a population of acutely unwell, hospitalised patients and describe how data collection challenges have been informed by our pilot phase. Mixed multinomial logit regression analysis will be used to estimate the final results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by a university ethics committee as well as two participating hospital ethics committees. Results will be used within a knowledge translation framework to inform any strategies that can be used by nursing staff to improve the uptake of bedside handover. Results will also be disseminated via peer-reviewed journal articles and will be presented at national and international conferences.

The effect of traffic lights and regulatory statements on the choice between complementary and conventional medicines in Australia: results from a discrete choice experiment.

It has been suggested that complementary medicines are currently 'under-regulated' in some countries due to their potential for harm as a direct result from side-effects or interactions; from delaying more effective care; or from the economic cost of purchasing an ineffective or inappropriate treatment. The requirement of additional labelling on complementary medicine products has been suggested in Australia and may provide additional information to consumers at the point of purchase. This paper details a unique way of testing the potential effects on consumer behaviour of including either a traffic light logo or regulatory statement on labels. Using a discrete choice experiment, data were collected in 2012 in a sample of 521 Australians with either type 2 diabetes or cardiovascular disease. We find that additional labelling can affect consumer behaviour, but in unpredictable ways. The results of this experiment are informative to further the dialogue concerning possible regulatory mechanisms.