Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Patients’ willingness to pay for electronic communication with their general practitioner

  • Original paper
  • Published:
The European Journal of Health Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite the common use of electronic communication in other aspects of everyday life, its use between patients and health care providers has been slow to diffuse. Possible explanations are security issues and lack of payment mechanisms. This study investigated how patients value secure electronic access to their general practitioner (GP). One hundred and ninety-nine patients were asked an open-ended willingness-to-pay (WTP) question as part of a randomised controlled trial. We compared the WTP values between two groups of respondents; one group had had the opportunity to communicate electronically with their GP for a year and the other group had not. Fifty-two percent of the total sample was willing to pay for electronic GP contact. The group of patients with access revealed a significantly lower WTP than the group without such access. Possible explanations are that the system had fewer benefits than expected, a presence of hypothetical bias or simply a preference for face-to-face encounters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We also analysed the income adjusted for household size using Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) weights both in the logistic regression and the correlation analysis. We found no differences in the results when household-size-adjusted income was used as predictor variable.

References

  1. Katz, S.J., Moyer, C.A.: The emerging role of online communication between patients and their providers. J Gen Intern Med 19, 978–983 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Moyer, C.A., Stern, D.T., Dobias, K.S., Cox, D.T., Katz, S.J.: Bridging the electronic divide: patient and provider perspectives on e-mail communication in primary care. Am. J. Manag. Care 8, 427–33 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Harris, Interactive/ARiA (2000): Marketing healthcare satisfaction study. Rochester, Atlanta: Harris Interactive, ARiA Marketing (http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/downloads/HarrisAriaHCSatRpt.PDF, accessed Oct 2005)

  4. Kleiner, K.D., Akers, R., Burke, B.L., Werner, E.J.: Parent and physician attitudes regarding electronic communication in pediatric practices. Pediatrics 109, 740–744 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sittig, D.F., King, S., Hazlehurst, B.L.: A survey of patient-provider e-mail communication: what do patients think? Int. J. Med. Inform. 61, 71–80 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Couchman, G.R., Forjuoh, S.N., Rascoe, T.G.: E-mail communications in family practice: what do patients expect? J. Fam. Pract. 50, 414–418 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fridsma, D.B., Ford, P., Altman, R.: A survey of patient access to electronic mail: attitudes, barriers and opportunities. Proceedings of the annual symposium on computer application in medical care 15–19 (1994)

  8. Andreassen, H., Sandaune, A-G., Gammon, D., Hjortdahl, P.: Use of internet health services in Norway. Tidsskr. Nor. Laegeforen. 122, 1640–1644 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hassol, A., Walker, J.M., Kidder, D., et al.: Patient experience and attitude about access to a patient electronic health care record and linked web messaging. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 11, 505–513 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. White, C.B., Moyer, C.A., Stern, D.T., Katz, S.J.: A content analysis of e-mail communication between patients and their providers: patients get the message. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 11, 260–267 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Houston, K.T., Sands, D.Z., Jenckes, M.W., Ford, D.E.: Experiences of patients who where early adoptersof electronic communication with their physician: satisfaction, benefits and concerns. Am. J. Manage. Care. 10, 601–608 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sittig, D.F.: Result of a content analysis of electronic messages (e-mail) sent between patients and their physicians. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 3(1), 11 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Anand, S.G., Feldman, M.J., Geller, D.S., Bisbee, A., Bauchner H.: A content analysis of e-mail communication between primary care providers and parents. Pediatrics 115, 1283–1288 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bergmo, T.S., Kummervold, P.E., Gammon, D., Dahl, L.B.: Electronic patient-provider communication: will it offset office visits and telephone consultation in primary care? Int. J. Med. Inform. 74(9), 705–710 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Car, J., Sheikh, A.: E-mail consultation in health care: 2-acceptability and safe application. BMJ 329, 439–442 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mitchell, R., Carson, R.: Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method. Hopkins University Press, Washington DC (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Olsen, J.A., Smith, R.D.: Theory versus practice: a review in ‘willingness-to-pay’ in health and health care. Health Econ. 10, 39–52 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Smith, R.D.: Construction of the contingent valuation market in health care: a critical assessment. Health Econ. 12, 609–628 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Diener, A., O’Brien, B, Gafni, A.: Health care contingent valuation studies: a review and classification of the literature. Health Econ. 74, 313–326 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185, 1124–1131 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. van Exel, N.J.A., Brouwer, W.B.F., van den Berg, B., Koopmanschap, M.A.: With a little help from an anchor: Discussion and evidence of anchoring effects in contingent valuation. J Soc-Econ (in press), corrected proof (2006)

  22. Kummervold, P.E., Trondsen, M., Andreassen, H., Gammon, D., Hjortdahl, P.: Patient–physician interaction over the internet. Tidssk. Nor. Laegeforen. 124, 2633–2636 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Norwegian Centre for Telemedicine. PatientLink—project information http://www.telemed.no/index.php?language=en&cat=7457 (accessed January 2006)

  24. Peeters, G., Czapinski, J.: Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: the distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. Eur. Rev. Social Psychol 1, 33–60 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Smith, R.D.: It’s not just what you do, it’s the way that you do it: the effect of different payment card formats and survey administration on willingness to pay for health gain. Health Econ.15(3), 281–293 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Whynes, D.K., Frew, E., Wolstenholme, J.L.: A comparison of two methods for eliciting contingent valuations of collateral cancer screening. J. Health Econ. 22, 555–574 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Whynes, D.K., Philips, Z., Frew, E.: Think of a number ...any number? Health Econ. 14, 1191–1195 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Biemer, P.P., Lyberg, L.E.: Introduction to Survey Quality. Wiley, Hoboken (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Campanelli P.: Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A Stat. Soc. 168(3), 637–637 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Schkade, D.A., Payne, J.W.: How people respond to contingent valuation questions: a verbal protocol analysis of willingness to pay for an environmental regulation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 26(1), 88–109 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shiell, A., Gold, L.: If the price is right: vagueness and values clarification in contingent valuation. Health Econ. 12(11), 909–919 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Jan Abel Olsen, Per Egil Kummervold, an anonymous referee and all the patients and GPs at Sentrum Legekontor for their participation in this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Norwegian Centre for Telemedicine, University Hospital of North Norway, P.O. Box 35, 9038, Tromsø, Norway

    Trine Strand Bergmo & Silje Camilla Wangberg

Authors
  1. Trine Strand Bergmo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Silje Camilla Wangberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Trine Strand Bergmo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bergmo, T.S., Wangberg, S.C. Patients’ willingness to pay for electronic communication with their general practitioner. Eur J Health Econ 8, 105–110 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-006-0014-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-006-0014-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation