Mobile vaccination units to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake in areas with lower coverage: a within-neighbourhood analysis using national registration data, the Netherlands, September-December 2021.

BackgroundVaccine uptake differs between social groups. Mobile vaccination units (MV-units) were deployed in the Netherlands by municipal health services in neighbourhoods with low uptake of COVID-19 vaccines.AimWe aimed to evaluate the impact of MV-units on vaccine uptake in neighbourhoods with low vaccine uptake.MethodsWe used the Dutch national-level registry of COVID-19 vaccinations (CIMS) and MV-unit deployment registrations containing observations in 253 neighbourhoods where MV-units were deployed and 890 contiguous neighbourhoods (total observations: 88,543 neighbourhood-days). A negative binomial regression with neighbourhood-specific temporal effects using splines was used to study the effect.ResultsDuring deployment, the increase in daily vaccination rate in targeted neighbourhoods ranged from a factor 2.0 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8-2.2) in urbanised neighbourhoods to 14.5 (95% CI: 11.6-18.0) in rural neighbourhoods. The effects were larger in neighbourhoods with more voters for the Dutch conservative Reformed Christian party but smaller in neighbourhoods with a higher proportion of people with non-western migration backgrounds. The absolute increase in uptake over the complete intervention period ranged from 0.22 percentage points (95% CI: 0.18-0.26) in the most urbanised neighbourhoods to 0.33 percentage point (95% CI: 0.28-0.37) in rural neighbourhoods.ConclusionDeployment of MV-units increased daily vaccination rate, particularly in rural neighbourhoods, with longer travel distance to permanent vaccination locations. This public health intervention shows promise to reduce geographic and social health inequalities, but more proactive and long-term deployment is required to identify its potential to substantially contribute to overall vaccination rates at country level.

Societal Effects Are a Major Factor for the Uptake of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Digital Contact Tracing App in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: Our study investigates the extent to which uptake of a COVID-19 digital contact-tracing (DCT) app among the Dutch population is affected by its configurations, its societal effects, and government policies toward such an app. METHODS: We performed a discrete choice experiment among Dutch adults including 7 attributes, that is, who gets a notification, waiting time for testing, possibility for shops to refuse customers who have not installed the app, stopping condition for contact tracing, number of people unjustifiably quarantined, number of deaths prevented, and number of households with financial problems prevented. The data were analyzed by means of panel mixed logit models. RESULTS: The prevention of deaths and financial problems of households had a very strong influence on the uptake of the app. Predicted app uptake rates ranged from 24% to 78% for the worst and best possible app for these societal effects. We found a strong positive relationship between people's trust in government and people's propensity to install the DCT app. CONCLUSIONS: The uptake levels we find are much more volatile than the uptake levels predicted in comparable studies that did not include societal effects in their discrete choice experiments. Our finding that the societal effects are a major factor in the uptake of the DCT app results in a chicken-or-the-egg causality dilemma. That is, the societal effects of the app are severely influenced by the uptake of the app, but the uptake of the app is severely influenced by its societal effects.

What influences the outcome of active disinvestment processes in healthcare? A qualitative interview study on five recent cases of active disinvestment.

BACKGROUND: Recent attempts of active disinvestment (i.e. withdrawal of reimbursement by means of a policy decision) of reimbursed healthcare interventions in the Netherlands have differed in their outcome: some attempts were successful, with interventions actually being disinvested. Other attempts were terminated at some point, implying unsuccessful disinvestment. This study aimed to obtain insight into recent active disinvestment processes, and to explore what aspects affect their outcome. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted from January to December 2018 with stakeholders (e.g. patients, policymakers, physicians) who were involved in the policy process of five cases for which the full or partial withdrawal of reimbursement was considered in the Netherlands between 2007 and 2017: benzodiazepines, medication for Fabry disease, quit smoking programme, psychoanalytic therapy and maternity care assistance. These cases covered both interventions that were eventually disinvested and interventions for which reimbursement was maintained after consideration. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, double coded and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The 37 interviews showed that support for disinvestment from stakeholders, especially from healthcare providers and policymakers, strongly affected the outcome of the disinvestment process. Furthermore, the institutional role of stakeholders as legitimized by the Dutch health insurance system, their financial interests in maintaining or discontinuing reimbursement, and the possibility to relieve the consequences of disinvestment for current patients affected the outcome of the disinvestment process as well. A poor organization of patient groups may make it difficult for patients to exert pressure, which may contribute to successful disinvestment. No evidence was found of a consistent role of the formal Dutch package criteria (i.e. effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, necessity and feasibility) in active disinvestment processes. CONCLUSIONS: Contextual factors as well as the possibility to relieve the consequences of disinvestment for current patients are important determinants of the outcome of active disinvestment processes. These results provide insight into active disinvestment processes and their determinants, and provide guidance to policymakers for a potentially more successful approach for future active disinvestment processes.

Understanding a national increase in COVID-19 vaccination intention, the Netherlands, November 2020-March 2021.

The intention to get the COVID-19 vaccine increased from 48% (November 2020) to 75% (March 2021) as national campaigning in the Netherlands commenced. Using a mixed method approach we identified six vaccination beliefs and two contextual factors informing this increase. Analysis of a national survey confirmed that shifting intentions were a function of shifting beliefs: people with stronger intention to vaccinate were most motivated by protecting others and reopening society; those reluctant were most concerned about side effects.

Commitment Lotteries Promote Physical Activity Among Overweight Adults-A Cluster Randomized Trial.

Background: The World Health Organization has identified physical inactivity as the fourth leading risk factor for global mortality. People often intend to engage in physical activity on a regular basis, but have trouble doing so. To realize their health goals, people can voluntarily accept deadlines with consequences that restrict undesired future behaviors (i.e., commitment devices). Purpose: We examined if lottery-based deadlines that leverage regret aversion would help overweight individuals in attaining their goal of attending their gym twice per week. At each deadline a lottery winner was drawn from all participants. The winners were only eligible for their prize if they attained their gym-attendance goals. Importantly, nonattending lottery winners were informed about their forgone prize. The promise of this counterfactual feedback was designed to evoke anticipated regret and emphasize the deadlines. Methods: Six corporate gyms with a total of 163 overweight participants were randomized to one of three arms. We compared (i) weekly short-term lotteries for 13 weeks; (ii) the same short-term lotteries in combination with an additional long-term lottery after 26 weeks; and (iii) a control arm without lotteries. Results: After 13 weeks, participants in the lottery arms attained their attendance goals more often than participants in the control arm. After 26 weeks, we observe a decline in goal attainment in the short-term lottery arm and the highest goal attainment in the long-term lottery arm. Conclusions: With novel applications, the current research adds to a growing body of research that demonstrates the effectiveness of commitment devices in closing the gap between health goals and behavior. Clinical Trial information: This trial is registered in the Dutch Trial Register. Identifier: NTR5559.

Physical activity after commitment lotteries: examining long-term results in a cluster randomized trial.

To overcome self-control difficulties, people can commit to their health goals by voluntarily accepting deadlines with consequences. In a commitment lottery, the winners are drawn from all participants, but can only claim their prize if they also attained their gym-attendance goals. In a 52-week, three-arm trial across six company gyms, we tested if commitment lotteries with behavioral economic underpinnings would promote physical activity among overweight adults. In previous work, we presented an effective 26-week intervention. In the present paper we analyzed maintenance of goal attainment at 52-week follow-up and the development of weight over time. We compared weight and goal attainment (gym attendance ≥ 2 per week) between three arms that-in the intervention period- consisted of (I) weekly short-term lotteries for 13 weeks; (II) the same short-term lotteries in combination with an additional long-term lottery after 26 weeks; and (III) a control arm without lottery-deadlines. After a successful 26-week intervention, goal attainment declined between weeks 27 and 52 in the long-term lottery arm, but remained higher than in the control group. Goal attainment did not differ between the short-term lottery arm and control arm. Weight declined slightly in all arms in the first 13 weeks of the trial and remained stable from there on. Commitment lotteries can support regular gym attendance up to 52 weeks, but more research is needed to achieve higher levels of maintenance and weight loss.

Emotional responses to behavioral economic incentives for health behavior change.

Many people aim to change their lifestyle, but have trouble acting on their intentions. Behavioral economic incentives and related emotions can support commitment to personal health goals, but the related emotions remain unexplored. In a regret lottery, winners who do not attain their health goals do not get their prize but receive feedback on what their forgone earnings would have been. This counterfactual feedback should provoke anticipated regret and increase commitment to health goals. We explored which emotions were actually expected upon missing out on a prize due to unsuccessful weight loss and which incentive-characteristics influence their likelihood and intensity. Participants reported their expected emotional response after missing out on a prize in one of 12 randomly presented incentive-scenarios, which varied in incentive type, incentive size and deadline distance. Participants primarily reported feeling disappointment, followed by regret. Regret was expected most when losing a lottery prize (vs. a fixed incentive) and intensified with prize size. Multiple features of the participant and the lottery incentive increase the occurrence and intensity of regret. As such, our findings can be helpful in designing behavioral economic incentives that leverage emotions to support health behavior change.

Impact of Survey Administration Mode on the Results of a Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiment: Online and Paper Comparison.

BACKGROUND: Electronic data collection is increasingly being used for discrete choice experiments (DCEs). OBJECTIVES: To study whether paper or electronic administration results in measurement effects. METHODS: Respondents were drawn from the same sample frame (an Internet panel) and completed a nearly identical DCE survey either online or on paper during the same period. A DCE on preferences for basic health insurance served as a case study. We used panel mixed logit models for the analysis. RESULTS: In total, 898 respondents completed the survey: 533 respondents completed the survey online, whereas 365 respondents returned the paper survey. There were no significant differences with respect to sociodemographic characteristics between the respondents in both samples. The median response time was shorter for the online sample than for the paper sample, and a smaller proportion of respondents from the online sample were satisfied with the number of choice sets. Although some willingness- to-pay estimates were higher for the online sample, the elicited preferences for basic health insurance characteristics were similar between both modes of administration. CONCLUSIONS: We find no indication that online surveys yield inferior results compared with paper-based surveys, whereas the price per respondent is lower for online surveys. Researchers might want to include fewer choice sets per respondent when collecting DCE data online. Because our findings are based on a nonrandomized DCE that covers one health domain only, research in other domains is needed to support our findings.

Use of electronic medical records and quality of patient data: different reaction patterns of doctors and nurses to the hospital organization.

BACKGROUND: As the implementation of Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) in hospitals may be challenged by different responses of different user groups, this paper examines the differences between doctors and nurses in their response to the implementation and use of EMRs in their hospital and how this affects the perceived quality of the data in EMRs. METHODS: Questionnaire data of 402 doctors and 512 nurses who had experience with the implementation and the use of EMRs in hospitals was analysed with Multi group Structural equation modelling (SEM). The models included measures of organisational factors, results of the implementation (ease of use and alignment of EMR with daily routine), perceived added value, timeliness of use and perceived quality of patient data. RESULTS: Doctors and nurses differ in their response to the organisational factors (support of IT, HR and administrative departments) considering the success of the implementation. Nurses respond to culture while doctors do not. Doctors and nurses agree that an EMR that is easier to work with and better aligned with their work has more added value, but for the doctors this is more pronounced. The doctors and nurses perceive that the quality of the patient data is better when EMRs are easier to use and better aligned with their daily routine. CONCLUSIONS: The result of the implementation, in terms of ease of use and alignment with work, seems to affect the perceived quality of patient data more strongly than timeliness of entering patient data. Doctors and nurses value bottom-up communication and support of the IT department for the result of the implementation, and nurses respond to an open and innovative organisational culture.

Survival or Mortality: Does Risk Attribute Framing Influence Decision-Making Behavior in a Discrete Choice Experiment?

OBJECTIVE: To test how attribute framing in a discrete choice experiment (DCE) affects respondents' decision-making behavior and their preferences. METHODS: Two versions of a DCE questionnaire containing nine choice tasks were distributed among a representative sample of the Dutch population aged 55 to 65 years. The DCE consisted of four attributes related to the decision regarding participation in genetic screening for colorectal cancer (CRC). The risk attribute included was framed positively as the probability of surviving CRC and negatively as the probability of dying from CRC. Panel mixed-logit models were used to estimate the relative importance of the attributes. The data of the positively and negatively framed DCE were compared on the basis of direct attribute ranking, dominant decision-making behavior, preferences, and importance scores. RESULTS: The majority (56%) of the respondents ranked survival as the most important attribute in the positively framed DCE, whereas only a minority (8%) of the respondents ranked mortality as the most important attribute in the negatively framed DCE. Respondents made dominant choices based on survival significantly more often than based on mortality. The framing of the risk attribute significantly influenced all attribute-level estimates and resulted in different preference structures among respondents in the positively and negatively framed data set. CONCLUSIONS: Risk framing affects how respondents value the presented risk. Positive risk framing led to increased dominant decision-making behavior, whereas negative risk framing led to risk-seeking behavior. Attribute framing should have a prominent part in the expert and focus group interviews, and different types of framing should be used in the pilot version of DCEs as well as in actual DCEs to estimate the magnitude of the effect of choosing different types of framing.

Exploring how individuals complete the choice tasks in a discrete choice experiment: an interview study.

BACKGROUND: To be able to make valid inferences on stated preference data from a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) it is essential that researchers know if participants were actively involved, understood and interpreted the provided information correctly and whether they used complex decision strategies to make their choices and thereby acted in accordance with the continuity axiom. METHODS: During structured interviews, we explored how 70 participants evaluated and completed four discrete choice tasks aloud. Hereafter, additional questions were asked to further explore if participants understood the information that was provided to them and whether they used complex decision strategies (continuity axiom) when making their choices. Two existing DCE questionnaires on rotavirus vaccination and prostate cancer-screening served as case studies. RESULTS: A large proportion of the participants was not able to repeat the exact definition of the risk attributes as explained to them in the introduction of the questionnaire. The majority of the participants preferred more optimal over less optimal risk attribute levels. Most participants (66%) mentioned three or more attributes when motivating their decisions, thereby acting in accordance with the continuity axiom. However, 16 out of 70 participants continuously mentioned less than three attributes when motivating their decision. Lower educated and less literate participants tended to mention less than three attributes when motivating their decision and used trading off between attributes less often as a decision-making strategy. CONCLUSION: The majority of the participants seemed to have understood the provided information about the choice tasks, the attributes, and the levels. They used complex decision strategies (continuity axiom) and are therefore capable to adequately complete a DCE. However, based on the participants' age, educational level and health literacy additional, actions should be undertaken to ensure that participants understand the choice tasks and complete the DCE as presumed.

Public preferences for vaccination programmes during pandemics caused by pathogens transmitted through respiratory droplets - a discrete choice experiment in four European countries, 2013.

This study aims to quantify and compare preferences of citizens from different European countries for vaccination programme characteristics during pandemics, caused by pathogens which are transmitted through respiratory droplets. Internet panel members, nationally representative based on age, sex, educational level and region, of four European Union Member States (Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and Sweden, n = 2,068) completed an online discrete choice experiment. These countries, from different geographical areas of Europe, were chosen because of the availability of high-quality Internet panels and because of the cooperation between members of the project entitled Effective Communication in Outbreak Management: development of an evidence-based tool for Europe (ECOM). Data were analysed using panel latent class regression models. In the case of a severe pandemic scenario, vaccine effectiveness was the most important characteristic determining vaccination preference in all countries, followed by the body that advises on vaccination. In Sweden, the advice of family and/or friends and the advice of physicians strongly affected vaccine preferences, in contrast to Poland and Spain, where the advice of (international) health authorities was more decisive. Irrespective of pandemic scenario or vaccination programme characteristics, the predicted vaccination uptakes were lowest in Sweden, and highest in Poland. To increase vaccination uptake during future pandemics, the responsible authorities should align with other important stakeholders in the country and communicate in a coordinated manner.

Consistency between stated and revealed preferences: a discrete choice experiment and a behavioural experiment on vaccination behaviour compared.

BACKGROUND: Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) are increasingly used in studies in healthcare research but there is still little empirical evidence for the predictive value of these hypothetical situations in similar real life circumstances. The aim of this paper is to compare the stated preferences in a DCE and the accompanying questionnaire with the revealed preferences of young parents who have to decide whether to vaccinate their new born child against hepatitis B. METHODS: A DCE asking parents to decide in which scenario they would be more inclined to vaccinate their child against hepatitis B. The stated preference was estimated by comparing the per respondent utility of the most realistic scenario in which parents could choose to vaccinate their child against hepatitis B, with the utility of the opt-out, based on the mixed logit model from the DCE. This stated preference was compared with the actual behaviour of the parents concerning the vaccination of their new born child. RESULTS: In 80% of the respondents the stated and revealed preferences corresponded. The positive predictive value is 85% but the negative predictive value is 26%. CONCLUSIONS: The predictive value of the DCE in this study is satisfactory for predicting the positive choice but not for predicting the negative choice. However, the behaviour in this study is exceptional in the sense that most people chose to vaccinate. Future studies should focus on behaviours with a larger variance in the population.

Empowerment of patients in online discussions about medicine use.

BACKGROUND: Patient empowerment is crucial in the successful self-management of people with chronic diseases. In this study, we investigated whether discussions about medicine use taking place on online message boards contribute to patient empowerment and could subsequently result in the more effective use of medicines. We discuss the extent to which patient empowerment processes occur in discussions on online message boards, focusing on patients with three disorders with different characteristics: diabetes, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Because information is an important factor in both patient empowerment and self-management, we also evaluate the quality of the information being exchanged. METHODS: We used a deductive thematic analysis method based on pre-existing categories. We gathered and analysed 5532 posts related to the conditions ADHD, ALS and diabetes from seven message boards (three for ADHD, three for diabetes, and one for ALS). We coded the posts for empowerment processes and the quality of the information exchanged. RESULTS: We identified patient empowerment processes in posts related to all three disorders. There is some variation in the frequency of these processes, but they show a similar order in the results: patients used the online message boards to exchange information, share personal experiences and for empathy or support. The type of information shared in these processes could contribute to the patient's self-efficacy when it comes to medicine use. The exchanged information was either correct or largely harmless. We also observed a tendency whereby participants correct previously posted incorrect information, and refer people to a healthcare professional following a request for medical advice, e.g. concerning the choice of medicines or dosage. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that patient empowerment processes occur in posts related to all three disorders. The type of information shared in these processes can contribute to the patient's self-efficacy when it comes to medicine use. The tendency to refer people to a healthcare professional shows that patients still reserve an important role for healthcare professionals in the care process, despite the development towards more self-management.

The effect of out-of-pocket costs and financial rewards in a discrete choice experiment: an application to lifestyle programs.

BACKGROUND: Both out-of-pocket costs and financial rewards can be used to influence health related behavior. However, it is unclear which of these two has a larger effect on health related behavior. The aim of this study was to explore the possible difference in effect size between out-of-pocket costs and financial rewards on the willingness of diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) patients to participate in a lifestyle program. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire was sent to 767 DM2 patients in a geographically defined area (De Leidsche Rijn, Utrecht) in The Netherlands and completed by 206 of them. The questionnaire comprised of 18 choice tasks of which 9 contained a financial reward for lifestyle program completion, while the other 9 included out-of-pocket costs for program participation. In a second version of the questionnaire, the order of out-of-pocket cost and financial reward choice tasks was counterbalanced to reduce bias with respect to the position (first or second) of the two types of choice tasks. Panel-mixed-multinomial-logit models were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Increasing out-of-pocket costs were associated with a decreasing willingness to participate in a lifestyle program and, contrary to our expectations, increasing financial rewards were also associated with a decreasing willingness to participate in a lifestyle program. In addition, this willingness to participate changed to the same extent for both increasing out-of-pocket costs and increasing financial rewards. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, increasing out-of-pocket costs may prevent people from deciding to participate in a lifestyle program. However, offering a financial reward to persuade people to participate in a lifestyle program, may result in decreasing willingness to participate in a lifestyle program as well.

Type 2 diabetes patients' preferences and willingness to pay for lifestyle programs: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Participation rates of lifestyle programs among type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients are less than optimal around the globe. Whereas research shows notable delays in the development of the disease among lifestyle program participants. Very little is known about the relative importance of barriers for participation as well as the willingness of T2DM patients to pay for participation in such programs. The aim of this study was to identify the preferences of T2DM patients with regard to lifestyle programs and to calculate participants' willingness to pay (WTP) as well as to estimate the potential participation rates of lifestyle programs. METHODS: A Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) questionnaire assessing five different lifestyle program attributes was distributed among 1250 Dutch adults aged 35-65 years with T2DM, 391 questionnaires (31%) were returned and included in the analysis. The relative importance of the program attributes (i.e., meal plan, physical activity (PA) schedule, consultation structure, expected program outcome and out-of-pocket costs) was determined using panel-mixed logit models. Based on the retrieved attribute estimates, patients' WTP and potential participation rates were determined. RESULTS: The out-of-pocket costs (ß = -0.75, P < .001), consultation structure (ß = -0.46, P < .001) and expected outcome (ß =0.72, P < .001) were the most important factors for respondents when deciding whether to participate in a lifestyle program. Respondents were willing to pay €128 per year for individual instead of group consultation and €97 per year for 10 kilograms anticipated weight loss. Potential participation rates for different lifestyle-program scenarios ranged between 48.5% and 62.4%. CONCLUSIONS: When deciding whether to participate in a lifestyle program, T2DM patients are mostly driven by low levels of out-of-pocket costs. Thereafter, they prefer individual consultation and high levels of anticipated outcomes with respect to weight loss.

Differentiating innovation priorities among stakeholder in hospital care.

BACKGROUND: Decisions to adopt a particular innovation may vary between stakeholders because individual stakeholders may disagree on the costs and benefits involved. This may translate to disagreement between stakeholders on priorities in the implementation process, possibly explaining the slow diffusion of innovations in health care. In this study, we explore the differences in stakeholder preferences for innovations, and quantify the difference in stakeholder priorities regarding costs and benefits. METHODS: The decision support technique called the analytic hierarchy process was used to quantify the preferences of stakeholders for nine information technology (IT) innovations in hospital care. The selection of the innovations was based on a literature review and expert judgments. Decision criteria related to the costs and benefits of the innovations were defined. These criteria were improvement in efficiency, health gains, satisfaction with care process, and investments required. Stakeholders judged the importance of the decision criteria and subsequently prioritized the selected IT innovations according to their expectations of how well the innovations would perform for these decision criteria. RESULTS: The stakeholder groups (patients, nurses, physicians, managers, health care insurers, and policy makers) had different preference structures for the innovations selected. For instance, self-tests were one of the innovations most preferred by health care insurers and managers, owing to their expected positive impacts on efficiency and health gains. However, physicians, nurses and patients strongly doubted the health gains of self-tests, and accordingly ranked self-tests as the least-preferred innovation. CONCLUSIONS: The various stakeholder groups had different expectations of the value of the nine IT innovations. The differences are likely due to perceived stakeholder benefits of each innovation, and less to the costs to individual stakeholder groups. This study provides a first exploratory quantitative insight into stakeholder positions concerning innovation in health care, and presents a novel way to study differences in stakeholder preferences. The results may be taken into account by decision makers involved in the implementation of innovations.

Did the temporary suspension of Vaxzveria vaccinations influence COVID-19 vaccination intentions, vaccination perceptions and trust in the vaccination campaign? A repeated survey study in the Netherlands.

In spring 2021, several countries, among which the Netherlands, suspended vaccinations against COVID-19 with the Vaxzevria vaccine from AstraZeneca after reports of rare but severe adverse events. This study investigates the influence of this suspension on the Dutch public's perceptions of COVID-19 vaccinations, trust in the government's vaccination campaign, and COVID-19 vaccination intentions. We conducted two surveys in a population of general Dutch public (18 + ), one shortly before the pause of AstraZeneca vaccinations and one shortly thereafter (N eligible for analysis = 2628). Our results suggest no changes in perceptions nor intentions regarding the COVID-19 vaccines in general but do suggest a decline in trust in the government's vaccination campaign. In addition, after the suspension, perceptions of the AstraZeneca vaccines were more negative in comparison to those of COVID-19 vaccinations in general. AstraZeneca vaccination intentions were also considerably lower. These results stress the need to adapt vaccination policies to anticipated public perceptions and responses following a vaccine safety scare, as well as the importance of informing citizens about the possibility of very rare adverse events prior to the introduction of novel vaccines.

To what extent do citizens support the disinvestment of healthcare interventions? An exploration of the support for four viewpoints on active disinvestment in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Active disinvestment of healthcare interventions (i.e. discontinuing reimbursement by means of a policy decision) has received limited public support in the past. Previous research has identified four viewpoints on active disinvestment among citizens in the Netherlands. However, it remained unclear how strong these viewpoints are supported by society, and by whom. Therefore, the current study aimed to 1) measure the support for these four viewpoints and 2) assess whether support is associated with background characteristics of citizens. METHOD: In an online survey, a representative sample of adult citizens in the Netherlands (n = 1794) was asked to rate their agreement with short narratives of the four viewpoints on a 7-point Likert scale. The survey also included questions on sociodemographic characteristics, health status, healthcare utilization, and opinions about responsibility and costs in the healthcare context. Logistic regression models were estimated for each viewpoint to assess the association between viewpoint support and these characteristics. RESULTS: The support for the different viewpoints varied between 46.8% and 57.7% of the sample. Viewpoint support was associated with participants' age, gender, educational level, financial situation, healthcare utilization, opinion on the responsibility of the government for the health of citizens, and opinion on whether the increase in healthcare expenditure and health insurance premiums is considered a problem. CONCLUSION: Resistance to active disinvestment may partially be explained by the consequences of disinvestment citizens anticipate experiencing themselves. Citizens considering the increase in healthcare expenditure a larger problem were more supportive of disinvestment than those considering it less of a problem.

"Please, you go first!" preferences for a COVID-19 vaccine among adults in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is generally considered the most direct way to restoring normal life after the outbreak of COVID-19, but the available COVID-19 vaccines are simultaneously embraced and dismissed. Mapping factors for vaccine hesitancy may help the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccines and provide valuable insights for future pandemics. OBJECTIVES: We investigate how characteristics of a COVID-19 vaccine affect the preferences of adult citizens in the Netherlands to take the vaccine directly, to refuse it outright, or to wait a few months and first look at the experiences of others. METHODS: An online sample of 895 respondents participated between November 4th and November 10th, 2020 in a discrete choice experiment including the attributes: percentage of vaccinated individuals protected against COVID-19, month in which the vaccine would become available and the number of cases of mild and severe side effects. The data was analysed by means of panel mixed logit models. RESULTS: Respondents found it important that a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine becomes available as soon as possible. However, the majority did not want to be the first in line and would rather wait for the experiences of others. The predicted uptake of a vaccine with the optimal combination of attributes was 87%, of whom 55% preferred to take the vaccine after a waiting period. This latter group tends to be lower-educated. Older respondents gave more weight to vaccine effectiveness than younger respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine is high among adults in the Netherlands, but a considerable proportion prefers to delay their decision to vaccinate until experiences of others are known. Offering this wait-and-see group the opportunity to accept the invitation at a later moment may stimulate vaccination uptake. Our results further suggest that vaccination campaigns targeted at older citizens should focus on the effectiveness of the vaccine.