London Patient Choice Project Evaluation

A model of patients’ choices of hospital from stated and revealed preference choice data

Peter Burge, Nancy Devlin, John Appleby, Charlene Rohr, Jonathan Grant

ResearchPublished Jun 30, 2005

The London Patient Choice Project (LPCP) was established to offer choices to patients who were clinically eligible for treatment and had been waiting for treatment at an NHS London hospital beyond a target waiting time. This report covers the choice process and the trade-offs patients are willing to make in order to obtain earlier treatment. The approach adopted uses a disaggregate discrete choice framework with both stated preference (SP) survey data and revealed preference (RP) choice data. We provide insights into how patients value various aspects of their current choices and how they may value choices that are currently outside of the scope of the LPCP. The analysis identifies reputation of hospital as one of the key drivers of choice. The modelling results inform policy makers of the potential benefits of different ways of structuring and informing patients’ choices, with the potential for far greater customisation according to the patient.

Topics

Document Details

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Burge, Peter, Nancy Devlin, John Appleby, Charlene Rohr, and Jonathan Grant, London Patient Choice Project Evaluation: A model of patients’ choices of hospital from stated and revealed preference choice data. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2005. https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR230.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was prepared for the London Patient Choice Project Team, Department of Health and was conducted by RAND Europe.

This publication is part of the RAND technical report series. RAND technical reports, products of RAND from 2003 to 2011, presented research findings on a topic limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; discussions of the methodology employed in research; literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; and preliminary findings. All RAND technical reports were subject to rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.