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.

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.

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.

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.

Regional practice variation in induction of labor in the Netherlands: Does it matter? A multilevel analysis of the association between induction rates and perinatal and maternal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Practice variation in healthcare is a complex issue. We focused on practice variation in induction of labor between maternity care networks in the Netherlands. These collaborations of hospitals and midwifery practices are jointly responsible for providing high-quality maternity care. We explored the association between induction rates and maternal and perinatal outcomes. METHODS: In a retrospective population-based cohort study, we included records of 184,422 women who had a singleton, vertex birth of their first child after a gestation of at least 37 weeks in the years 2016-2018. We calculated induction rates for each maternity care network. We divided networks in induction rate categories: lowest (Q1), moderate (Q2-3) and highest quartile (Q4). We explored the association of these categories with unplanned caesarean sections, unfavorable maternal outcomes and adverse perinatal outcomes using descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regression analysis corrected for population characteristics. FINDINGS: The induction rate ranged from 14.3% to 41.1% (mean 24.4%, SD 5.3). Women in Q1 had fewer unplanned caesarean sections (Q1: 10.2%, Q2-3: 12.1%; Q4: 12.8%), less unfavorable maternal outcomes (Q1: 33.8%; Q2-3: 35.7%; Q4: 36.3%) and less adverse perinatal outcomes (Q1: 1.0%; Q2-3: 1.1%; Q4: 1.3%). The multilevel analysis showed a lower unplanned caesarean section rate in Q1 in comparison with reference category Q2-3 (OR 0.83; p = .009). The unplanned caesarean section rate in Q4 was similar to the reference category. No significant associations with unfavorable maternal or adverse perinatal outcomes were observed. CONCLUSION: Practice variation in labor induction is high in Dutch maternity care networks, with limited association with maternal outcomes and no association with perinatal outcomes. Networks with low induction rates had lower unplanned caesarean section rates compared to networks with moderate rates. Further in-depth research is necessary to understand the mechanisms that contribute to practice variation and the observed association with unplanned caesarean sections.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Comprehensibility of a personalized medication overview compared to usual-care prescription drug labels.

Poor understanding of prescription drug label (PDL) instructions can lead to medication errors, suboptimal treatment (side) effects, and non-adherence. A personalized medication hard-copy overview listing PDL instructions and visual information may support patients in their medication use. This study aimed to investigate the comprehensibility of PDL instructions on a personalized medication overview compared to usual-care PDL instructions presented on a medication box. A hypothetical-online-experiment was set up, comparing groups of respondents exposed vs not exposed to the medication overview and who received PDL instructions for three, five, or eight medications. Participants were divided randomly in six groups. Online questionnaires were sent to a stratified sample of 900 members from the Nivel Dutch Healthcare Consumer Panel. Outcome measures included comprehension of instructions for medication use, e.g. how often, dose timing, usage advice and warnings for a medication with simple use instructions (omeprazol) and more complex use instructions (levodopa/carbidopa (L/C)). To analyze differences between experimental conditions ANOVA testing was used. 604 respondents (net response 67%) completed the questionnaires. Respondents exposed (E) to the overview gave a higher proportion of correct answers compared to non-exposed (NE) respondents for usage advice (L/C: mean 0.83, SD 0.4 E; 0.03, SD 0.2 NE, p < 0.001; omeprazol: mean 0.85, SD 0.4 E; 0.10, SD 0.3 NE, p < 0.001). Both groups gave the same proportion of correct answers (mean 0.80, SD 0.4, p = 1.0) for dose timing of omeprazol. More NE respondents gave correct answers for how often (mean 0.85, SD 0.4 NE; mean 0.76, SD 0.4 E, p = 0.02) and dose timing (mean 0.92, SD 0.3 NE; mean 0.86, SD 0.4 E, p = 0.04) of L/C. No differences were found regarding number of medications nor were interaction effects found between the number of medications and information type. As a medication overview contains additional information, it can be a good addition in supporting patients in their medication use compared to usual-care PDLs. Future research should focus on identifying patient groups who might benefit more from a medication overview, by testing the effect of such overview on this group.

Health insurance literacy in the Netherlands: The translation and validation of the United States' Health Insurance Literacy Measure (HILM).

An important criterion for the proper functioning of a managed competition healthcare system, such as operates in the Netherlands, is that all citizens can make well-informed decisions regarding their health insurance policy. In order to achieve this, citizens need certain health insurance literacy skills. It is not known how far citizens in the Netherlands have these skills. The aim of this study is to provide a reliable instrument that measures the health insurance literacy of citizens in the Netherlands. It would be based upon an existing instrument developed in the US. We translated the US Health Insurance Literacy Measure (HILM) into Dutch. Furthermore, we established the psychometric properties of the Dutch version (HILM-NL), and we validated the HILM-NL in a general population sample by sending surveys to members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (DHCCP) in February and March 2020. The response rates were respectively 54% (n = 806) and 56% (n = 595). No insurmountable difficulties with equivalence were encountered throughout the translation process. The HILM-NL showed an acceptable level of internal consistency, good test-retest reliability, and a good construct validity. The HILM-NL is a reliable instrument for measuring health insurance literacy among citizens in the Netherlands. With this instrument, it is better possible both to assess how these citizens choose and use a health insurance policy, and also the difficulties they face. It enables citizens in the Netherlands to be supported better in making well-informed decisions on health insurance.

Measuring health insurance literacy in the Netherlands - First results of the HILM-NL questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: There are several indications that citizens in the Netherlands struggle to make critical, well-considered decisions about which insurance policy best fits their needs and preferences. This can lead to citizens being sub-optimally insured, facing unexpected costs or suffering inadequate coverage. This study aims to examine how health insurance literacy (HIL) is distributed among citizens in the Netherlands; and to find out whether there are certain groups who have more difficulty choosing and using a health insurance policy. METHODS: We measured health insurance literacy using the HILM-NL questionnaire, the validated Dutch version of the original health insurance literacy measure (HILM). In February 2020, the HILM-NL was sent to 1,500 members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel. The response rate was 54% (806). RESULTS: There is a wide variation in HIL among citizens in the Netherlands. The average total HILM-NL score is 55.14 (on a range of 21-84). The level of education and the household net income are significantly related to HIL. CONCLUSIONS: Citizens who completed less education or earn a lower income are relatively more likely to have difficulty choosing a health insurance policy or using policy benefits to pay for health services once enrolled. It is important to support these vulnerable groups properly in their choice and use of a health insurance policy.

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.

Associations between Demographics, Tinnitus Specific-, Audiological-, General- and Mental Health Factors, and the Impact of Tinnitus on Daily Life.

Our objective was to study associations between demographics, tinnitus specific-, audiological-, general- and mental health characteristics, and impact of tinnitus in the general population. In this cross-sectional survey study in the Dutch population, data were prospectively gathered. Tinnitus impact was assessed with the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI). We included participants who experienced tinnitus and for whom a total TFI score could be calculated (n = 212). We performed univariable and multivariable regression analyses. Due to logarithmical transformation, the B-scores were back-transformed to show the actual difference in points on the TFI. People who considered hyperacusis a small problem had a 12.5-point higher TFI score, those who considered it a mediocre problem had a 17.6-point higher TFI score and those who considered it a large problem had a 24.1-point higher TFI score compared to people who did not consider hyperacusis a problem. People who indicated having minor hearing problems had a 10.5-point higher TFI score, those with mediocre hearing problems had a 20.4-point higher TFI score and those with severe hearing problems had a 41.6-point higher TFI score compared to people who did not have subjective hearing problems. In conclusion, audiological risk factors, such as hearing problems and hyperacusis, have the largest association with the impact of tinnitus on daily life, compared to other assessed variables. The results of this study can be used in future research to find targeted interventions to diminish the impact of tinnitus.

To what degree are health insurance enrollees in the Netherlands aware of the restrictive conditions attached to their policies?

BACKGROUND: Within the Dutch healthcare system of managed competition, health insurers can contract healthcare providers selectively. Enrollees who choose a health insurance policy with restrictive conditions will have to make a co-payment if they consult a non-contracted provider. This study aims to gain insight into enrollees' awareness of the conditions of such health insurance policies. METHODS: In August 2020, an online questionnaire was sent out via health insurers to their enrollees with restrictive health plans. In total 13,588 enrollees responded. RESULTS: One fifth of the respondents appeared to be totally unfamiliar with the policy conditions. Men, younger people, people with a low level of education, a lower income, a poorer health status and non-care users were found to be less familiar with the conditions. Of those who have been in the situation that they wanted to visit a healthcare provider whose care was not fully reimbursed, 62% went to that provider. Of those who had to pay extra because hospital care was not fully reimbursed, 62% did not know this in advance and 30% indicated that paying extra was a serious problem. CONCLUSIONS: Not all enrollees who choose a policy with restrictive conditions are aware of the consequences of receiving care from non-contracted providers. Increased awareness among enrollees will benefit the functioning of the healthcare system based on managed competition.

Does supplementary health insurance play a role in the switching behaviour of citizens in the Netherlands?

BACKGROUND: Several healthcare systems have elements of managed competition in which citizens can choose between multiple insurers. In order for this principle to function properly, all citizens should have equal opportunities to switch insurer. Studies, conducted around 2015, have shown that the supplementary insurance policy is perceived by citizens as a barrier to switching, which could have negative consequences for the intended goals of the system.. We aim to explore whether a supplementary insurance policy still has a restraining role on the opportunity to switch among citizens in the Netherlands from 2015 to 2020. Furthermore, we will examine if the extensiveness of the supplementary insurance policy relates to the switching behaviour of citizens. This element has not been addressed in previous studies. METHODS: We obtained information on the role of the supplementary health insurance policy in the switching behaviour of citizens by sending questionnaires, yearly in February from 2015-2020, to 1,500 members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (DHCCP) each year. As such, we were able to examine whether having a supplementary insurance policy plays a role in the decision of Dutch citizens to switch insurer. The response rates were consecutively from 2015 to 2020: 60% (n = 896), 47% (n = 703), 44% (n = 659), 50% (n = 751), 48% (n = 715), and 54% (n = 806). RESULTS: Citizens with a supplementary insurance policy switch less often than citizens without one. The extensiveness of the supplementary insurance policy is significantly associated with the decision of citizens to switch insurer; the more extensive citizens are insured, the less often they switch. Additionally, our results show that every year a small group of citizens does not switch insurer because they are concerned that they will not be accepted for a supplementary insurance policy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that having a supplementary insurance policy holds citizens back from using their opportunity to switch. This contributes to the idea that having a supplementary insurance policy could be experienced by citizens as a barrier to switch. This raises questions about the extent to which the principle of managed competition in the Dutch healthcare system works as intended.

The Importance of Choosing a Health Insurance Policy and the Ability to Comprehend That Choice for Citizens in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In a health insurance system based on managed competition, such as in the Netherlands, it is important that all citizens can make well-informed decisions on which policy fits their needs and preferences best. However, partly due to the large variety of health insurance policies, there are indications that a significant group of citizens do not make rational decisions when choosing a policy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to provide more insight into (1) how important it is for citizens in the Netherlands to choose a health insurance policy and (2) how easy it is for them to comprehend the information they receive. METHODS: Data were collected by sending a survey to members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel in February 2017. The response rate was 44% (N = 659). KEY RESULTS: Our results indicate that citizens in the Netherlands acknowledge the importance of choosing a health insurance policy, but they also point out that it is difficult to comprehend health insurance information. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that a section of the citizens do not have the appropriate skills to decide which insurance policy best fits their needs and preferences. Having better insight into their level of health insurance literacy is an important step in the process of evaluating the extent to which citizens can fulfill their role in the health insurance system. Our results suggest that it is important to better tailor information on health insurances to the specific needs and skills of the individual. By doing this, citizens will be better supported in making well-informed decisions regarding health insurance policies, which should have a positive effect on the functioning of the Dutch health insurance system. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2021;5(4):e287-e294.] Plain Language Summary: The number of health insurance policy options to choose from is extensive in the Netherlands. This study explored to what extent citizens in the Netherlands find it important to choose a health insurance policy, and to what extent they comprehend the information they receive. The data were collected in 2017 using the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel.

Using Different Cutoffs to Define Tinnitus and Assess Its Prevalence-A Survey in the Dutch General Population.

Introduction: Tinnitus prevalence numbers in the literature range between 5 and 43%, depending on the studied population and definition. It is unclear when tinnitus becomes pathologic. Objectives: To assess the tinnitus prevalence in the Dutch general population with different cutoffs for definition. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a questionnaire was sent to a sample (n = 2,251) of the Nivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research) Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel. Three questions were asked to assess the presence of tinnitus, duration, and frequency of the complaint. We classified people as having pathologic tinnitus when participants experienced it for 5-60 min (daily or almost daily or weekly), or tinnitus for >60 min or continuously (daily or almost daily or weekly or monthly), so tinnitus impact on daily life was measured with the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI) and a single-item question. Answers were stratified to mid-decade years of age. Prevalence numbers were weighted by gender and age to match the Dutch population. Results: Nine hundred thirty-two of 2,251 participants (41%) filled out the questionnaire. The median age was 67.0 (IQR 17) years. Three hundred thirty-eight of 932 (36%) experienced tinnitus for an undefined amount of time during the last year. Two hundred sixteen of 932 (23%) met our definition of having pathologic tinnitus (21% when weighted for age and gender). The median TFI score for all pathologic tinnitus participants was 16.6 (IQR 21.8). A percentage of 50.4% of the pathologic tinnitus participants had a TFI in the range 0-17, which can be interpreted as not a problem. Conclusion: Twenty-three percent (unweighted) or 21% (weighted) of our sample met our definition of pathologic tinnitus, which was based on a combination of duration and frequency over the last year. The TFI score of 47.7% of the pathologic tinnitus participants is ≥18. This indicates that they consider the tinnitus to be at least "a small problem" [11.1% (unweighted) or 8.9% (weighted) of the total study group]. This study illustrates the difficulties with defining pathologic tinnitus. In addition, it demonstrates that tinnitus prevalence numbers vary with different definitions and, consequently, stresses the importance of using a uniform definition of tinnitus.

Relationship between trust and patient involvement in medical decision-making: A cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients vary in their preferences regarding involvement in medical decision-making. Current research does not provide complete explanation for this observed variation. Patient involvement in medical decision-making has been found to be influenced by various mechanisms, one of which could be patients' trust in physicians. The aim of this study was to examine whether trust in physicians fosters or impairs patient involvement in medical decision-making. This study also aimed to determine to what extent the relationship between trust and preferences regarding decision-making roles was influenced by the sociodemographic characteristics of the patients. We hypothesised that trust can both foster and impair patient involvement in medical decision-making. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was sent out to members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel in February 2016 (response rate = 47%, N = 703). The Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale was used to measure trust. Patient involvement was measured using two items based on the study published by Flynn and colleagues in 2006. Multiple regression analysis was used to analyse the relationship between trust and patient involvement. RESULTS: We found a negative relationship between trust and patient involvement in medical decision-making in men. Women with high trust reported to be more involved in medical decision-making compared to men with high trust. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that trust impairs involvement in medical decision-making for men but not for women. Further research could provide a more comprehensive explanation of the variation in patient preferences regarding involvement in medical decision-making to further elucidate which underlying mechanisms could enhance patient participation.

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.