{"title":"Consumers’ preferences for endoscopes: a discrete choice experiment","authors":"Teik-Leong Chuah, Meenchee Hong, Behzad Foroughi","doi":"10.1108/ijphm-08-2020-0069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose\nInfection and cross-contamination have been massive concerns in the medical field. This study aims to investigate consumers’ awareness and their choices of endoscopes, which may deter them from the cross-contamination problem.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA discrete choice experiment survey was administered to 166 respondents in Penang, Malaysia. Participants were asked to make hypothetical choices and estimate their preference for endoscopes. The multinomial logit model was used to estimate the assumptions based on the stated preference data collected.\n\n\nFindings\nOnly two-fifths of respondents are aware of their rights regarding endoscope selection. The findings are consistent with utility theory, where choices are made to maximise personal satisfaction. If given the choice, consumers preferred the single-use endoscope over the reusable or the doctor’s preferred endoscope. Price, insurance coverage and personal income are significant determinants of the consumer’s choice of endoscopes.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThis study only investigates subjects living in Penang. Other possible important attributes to endoscope choices, such as environmental and device availability may be considered in future study.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe findings may create awareness among consumers about their rights when choosing medical devices. It may also improve health-care institutions’ (users’) and device manufacturers’ (industry players’) understanding of consumer needs and demands from socioeconomic perspectives.\n\n\nSocial implications\nThe research offers insights into consumer rights and awareness of health-care services. Ultimately leading to better policy to protect consumers’ rights and safety.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis study contributes to the rare literature on consumer rights toward medical devices, in particular, the consumer’s awareness of the choice of endoscopes.","PeriodicalId":51798,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijphm-08-2020-0069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
Infection and cross-contamination have been massive concerns in the medical field. This study aims to investigate consumers’ awareness and their choices of endoscopes, which may deter them from the cross-contamination problem.
Design/methodology/approach
A discrete choice experiment survey was administered to 166 respondents in Penang, Malaysia. Participants were asked to make hypothetical choices and estimate their preference for endoscopes. The multinomial logit model was used to estimate the assumptions based on the stated preference data collected.
Findings
Only two-fifths of respondents are aware of their rights regarding endoscope selection. The findings are consistent with utility theory, where choices are made to maximise personal satisfaction. If given the choice, consumers preferred the single-use endoscope over the reusable or the doctor’s preferred endoscope. Price, insurance coverage and personal income are significant determinants of the consumer’s choice of endoscopes.
Research limitations/implications
This study only investigates subjects living in Penang. Other possible important attributes to endoscope choices, such as environmental and device availability may be considered in future study.
Practical implications
The findings may create awareness among consumers about their rights when choosing medical devices. It may also improve health-care institutions’ (users’) and device manufacturers’ (industry players’) understanding of consumer needs and demands from socioeconomic perspectives.
Social implications
The research offers insights into consumer rights and awareness of health-care services. Ultimately leading to better policy to protect consumers’ rights and safety.
Originality/value
This study contributes to the rare literature on consumer rights toward medical devices, in particular, the consumer’s awareness of the choice of endoscopes.