Parturients' Stated Preferences for Labor Analgesia: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Objective: The objective was to investigate the extent to which treatment benefits, risks and costs affected parturients' preferences for labor analgesia. Methods: We recruited 248 healthy parturients prior to labor at an antenatal ward and administered a discrete choice experiment survey. Parturients were asked to choose among four hypothetical forms of labor analgesia: epidural analgesia, pethidine, Entonox and no analgesia, which were defined by: pain score, duration of second stage of labor, risks of instrumental delivery, back pain and permanent nerve injury, and out-of-pocket cost. We used mixed logit model to calculate the relative importance of each attribute (out of 100). Results: Parturients preferred receiving labor analgesia over not receiving analgesia and those who had positive past experience with epidural preferred epidural over other modalities. Out-of-pocket cost (28%), duration of second stage of labor (26%) and pain score following treatment (18%) were the most important attributes. Conclusion: Out-of-pocket cost was a major concern. Parturients prioritized having lower pain and shorter labor experience over risks associated with epidural analgesia. Parturients should be presented with realistic range of risks of side-effects so that they can decide how to balance risks against benefits and costs associated with child labor.

Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study.

Purpose. We investigated 1) perceived roles in decision-making among advanced cancer patients in 5 Asian countries 2) associations of patient characteristics with these roles, and 3) the association of perceived roles with quality of life and perceived quality of care. Methods. We surveyed 1585 patients with stage IV solid cancer. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to analyze associations of patient characteristics with decision-making roles. Multivariate regressions were used to analyze associations of decision-making roles with quality of life and care. Results. The most common perceived-role was no patient involvement. Most patients (73%) reported roles consistent with their preferences. Being male, nonminority, higher educated, aware of advanced cancer diagnosis, and knowledge of cancer diagnosis for ≥1 year were associated with higher levels of patient involvement in decision-making. Compared to no patient involvement, joint decision-making (together with physicians/family) was associated with higher social (ß = 2.49, P < 0.01) and spiritual (ß = 2.64, P < 0.01) well-being, and better quality of physician communication (ß = 9.73, P < 0.01) and care coordination (ß = 13.96, P < 0.01) while making decisions alone was associated with lower emotional (ß = -1.43, P < 0.01), social (ß = -2.39, P < 0.01), and spiritual (ß = -2.98, P < 0.01) well-being. Conclusions. Findings suggest that a substantial number of advanced cancer patients were not (and preferred not to be) involved in decision-making. Despite this finding, joint decision-making together with physicians/family was associated with better quality of life and care. Implications. Physicians should explain the benefits of shared decision making to patients and encourage participation in decision-making, while ensuring that patients feel supported and do not find decision-making overwhelming.

End-of-life cost trajectories and the trade-off between treatment costs and life-extension: Findings from the Cost and Medical Care of Patients with Advanced Serious Illness (COMPASS) cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed how patient preferences influence end-of-life costs. AIM: To estimate mean monthly healthcare costs in 2019 Singapore Dollars (SGD) at five time points within the last year of life and identify how patients' preferences for the trade-off between treatment cost containment and life-extension and other factors affect these costs. DESIGN: Mean monthly costs were quantified in the last 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12-months before death. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Billing records for 286 deceased participants in the Cost and Medical Care of Patients with Advanced Serious Illness (COMPASS) cancer cohort study in Singapore. RESULTS: Mean monthly costs were $5140 (95% CI: $4750; $5520) in the 12-months before death and rose to $8350 (95% CI: $7110; $9590) 1-month before death. Participants preferring higher cost containment/less life-extension defied the trend of increasing costs closer to death (mean monthly costs of $4630 (95% CI: $3690; $ 5580) and $4850 (95% CI: $2850; $6850) (12-months and 1-month before death respectively). Participants preferring lower cost containment/more life-extension had costs that were $1050 (95% CI: $49; $2051) and $5220 (95% CI: $2320; $8130) higher than those preferring lower costs/less life-extension 12-months and 1-month before death respectively. CONCLUSIONS: On average, cancer patients in Singapore can expect to spend $61,680 in the last year of life. Of broader relevance is that patient preferences and other observable factors clearly influence these costs, suggesting that policymakers and patients can better predict and budget for end-of-life costs by considering these factors.

A randomized controlled trial testing the effects of a positive front-of-pack label with or without a physical activity equivalent label on food purchases.

BACKGROUND: Positive front-of-pack (FOP) labels, including Singapore's Healthier Choice Symbol (HCS), target a subset of healthier products whose consumption is to be encouraged. However, this may inadvertently lead to excess caloric intake, which could be addressed by including an additional label identifying calories per serving. We test this hypothesis by adding a Physical Activity Equivalent (PAE) label, an indicator of calorie content, to all products available in an on-line grocery store. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial using a 3 arm within-subject crossover design in adult Singapore residents recruited online. Participants shopped once in each condition in an experimental online grocery store in random order: 1) no FOP label (Control); 2) Select products displaying HCS labels (HCS-only); 3) Condition 2 with additional information displaying PAEs per serving on every product (HCS+PAE). 117 participants were recruited and data from 317 shops were analyzed. We used first-differenced regressions to assess the impact of the conditions on calories per serving (primary) and on other measures of diet quality. RESULTS: The HCS-only condition led to a statistically significant five-percentage point increase in the proportion of HCS products purchased (95% CI, 1%: 9%). However, neither the HCS-only (3.45; 95% CI, -12.52: 19.43) nor HCS + PAE (8.14; 95% CI, -5.25: 21.54) condition led to a change in the number of calories per serving purchased or changes in other measures of diet quality. CONCLUSIONS: Positive labels, like the HCS, are likely to increase purchases of labelled products. However, these changes may not lead to improvements in diet quality or calorie intake. Combining positive labels with additional PAE information does not appear to address this concern.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating the Relative Effectiveness of the Multiple Traffic Light and Nutri-Score Front of Package Nutrition Labels.

The objective of this trial was to test two promising front-of-pack nutrition labels, 1) the United Kingdom's Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL) label and 2) France's Nutri-Score (NS), relative to a no-label control. We hypothesized that both labels would improve diet quality but NS would be more effective due to its greater simplicity. We tested this hypothesis via an online grocery store using a 3 × 3 crossover (within-person) design with 154 participants. Outcomes assessed via within person regression models include a modified Alternative Healthy Eating Index (AHEI)-2010 (primary), average Nutri-Score, calories purchased, and singular measures of diet quality of purchase orders. Results show that both labels significantly improve modified AHEI scores relative to Control but neither is statistically superior using this measure. NS performed statistically better than MTL and Control based on average Nutri-Score, yet, unlike MTL it did not statistically reduce calories or sugar from beverages. This suggest that NS may be preferred if the goal is to improve overall diet quality but, because calories are clearly displayed on the label, MTL may perform better if the goal is to reduce total energy intake.