Willingness to pay for a group and an individual version of the Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise program from a participant perspective

Thumbnail Image
Date
2022
Authors
Gottschalk, Sophie
König, Hans-Helmut
Nerz, Corinna
Becker, Clemens
Klenk, Jochen
Jansen, Carl-Philipp
Dams, Judith
Editors
Contact
Journal ISSN
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliographical data
Publisher
Series
DOI (citable link)
ArXiv-ID
International patent number
Link to the license
EU project number
Project
Open Access publication
Restricted until
Title in another language
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Publication type
Journal article
Publication status
Published
Published in
BMC Public Health ; 22 (2022). - 1934. - BioMed Central. - eISSN 1471-2458
Abstract
Background
Perceived benefits of intervention programs from a participant perspective can be examined by assessing their willingness to pay (WTP). Aiming to support decision-makers in their decision to implement a fall prevention program, this study examined (1) the WTP for a group-based and an individually delivered fall prevention program, (2) which factors influence WTP, and (3) whether the WTP exceeds the intervention costs.

Methods
WTP was elicited using Payment Cards from 237 individuals who participated in a randomized non-inferiority trial (LiFE-is-LiFE) comparing a group version of the Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise program (gLiFE) with the individually delivered version (LiFE). Linear regression models were used to examine factors associated with WTP. The net benefit for (g)LiFE was calculated as the difference between WTP and intervention costs, assuming different scenarios of intervention costs (varying group sizes of gLiFE) and hypothetical subsidy levels by a payer (€0, €50, or €75).

Results
The mean WTP was €196 (95% CI [172, 221]) for gLiFE and €228 (95% CI [204, 251]) for LiFE. In the linear regression model, WTP was significantly associated with delivery format (−€32, 95% CI [− 65, − 0.2], for gLiFE) and net household income (+ 68€, 95% CI [23, 113], for ≥€3000 compared to <€2000). The net benefit for gLiFE was positive in most cases. Due to higher intervention costs of LiFE compared to gLiFE (€298 vs. €113), the net benefit for LiFE was negative for the majority of the sample, even at a subsidy of €75.

Conclusion
The results provide insight into how valuable the interventions are perceived by the participants and thereby may be used by decision-makers as complement to cost-effectiveness analyses. WTP for both programs was generally high, probably indicating that participants perceived the intervention as quite valuable. However, further research is needed on the WTP and net benefit of fall prevention programs, as results relied on the specific context of the LiFE-is-LiFE trial.
Summary in another language
Subject (DDC)
796 Sport
Keywords
Conference
Review
undefined / . - undefined, undefined. - (undefined; undefined)
Cite This
ISO 690GOTTSCHALK, Sophie, Hans-Helmut KÖNIG, Michael SCHWENK, Corinna NERZ, Clemens BECKER, Jochen KLENK, Carl-Philipp JANSEN, Judith DAMS, 2022. Willingness to pay for a group and an individual version of the Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise program from a participant perspective. In: BMC Public Health. BioMed Central. 22, 1934. eISSN 1471-2458. Available under: doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14322-2
BibTex
@article{Gottschalk2022-10-18Willi-59024,
  year={2022},
  doi={10.1186/s12889-022-14322-2},
  title={Willingness to pay for a group and an individual version of the Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise program from a participant perspective},
  volume={22},
  journal={BMC Public Health},
  author={Gottschalk, Sophie and König, Hans-Helmut and Schwenk, Michael and Nerz, Corinna and Becker, Clemens and Klenk, Jochen and Jansen, Carl-Philipp and Dams, Judith},
  note={Article Number: 1934}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/59024">
    <dc:creator>Dams, Judith</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Dams, Judith</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/59024/1/Gottschalk_2-1iweza0copurp5.pdf"/>
    <dc:contributor>Becker, Clemens</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Klenk, Jochen</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:title>Willingness to pay for a group and an individual version of the Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise program from a participant perspective</dcterms:title>
    <dc:contributor>Klenk, Jochen</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Jansen, Carl-Philipp</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/35"/>
    <dc:contributor>Nerz, Corinna</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Background&lt;br /&gt;Perceived benefits of intervention programs from a participant perspective can be examined by assessing their willingness to pay (WTP). Aiming to support decision-makers in their decision to implement a fall prevention program, this study examined (1) the WTP for a group-based and an individually delivered fall prevention program, (2) which factors influence WTP, and (3) whether the WTP exceeds the intervention costs.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Methods&lt;br /&gt;WTP was elicited using Payment Cards from 237 individuals who participated in a randomized non-inferiority trial (LiFE-is-LiFE) comparing a group version of the Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise program (gLiFE) with the individually delivered version (LiFE). Linear regression models were used to examine factors associated with WTP. The net benefit for (g)LiFE was calculated as the difference between WTP and intervention costs, assuming different scenarios of intervention costs (varying group sizes of gLiFE) and hypothetical subsidy levels by a payer (€0, €50, or €75).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Results&lt;br /&gt;The mean WTP was €196 (95% CI [172, 221]) for gLiFE and €228 (95% CI [204, 251]) for LiFE. In the linear regression model, WTP was significantly associated with delivery format (−€32, 95% CI [− 65, − 0.2], for gLiFE) and net household income (+ 68€, 95% CI [23, 113], for ≥€3000 compared to &lt;€2000). The net benefit for gLiFE was positive in most cases. Due to higher intervention costs of LiFE compared to gLiFE (€298 vs. €113), the net benefit for LiFE was negative for the majority of the sample, even at a subsidy of €75.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Conclusion&lt;br /&gt;The results provide insight into how valuable the interventions are perceived by the participants and thereby may be used by decision-makers as complement to cost-effectiveness analyses. WTP for both programs was generally high, probably indicating that participants perceived the intervention as quite valuable. However, further research is needed on the WTP and net benefit of fall prevention programs, as results relied on the specific context of the LiFE-is-LiFE trial.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dc:creator>Schwenk, Michael</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Gottschalk, Sophie</dc:contributor>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/59024"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/35"/>
    <dc:creator>Becker, Clemens</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Gottschalk, Sophie</dc:creator>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-11-04T08:33:59Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-11-04T08:33:59Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:contributor>Jansen, Carl-Philipp</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:issued>2022-10-18</dcterms:issued>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/59024/1/Gottschalk_2-1iweza0copurp5.pdf"/>
    <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
    <dc:contributor>König, Hans-Helmut</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Schwenk, Michael</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Nerz, Corinna</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>König, Hans-Helmut</dc:creator>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Internal note
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Contact
URL of original publication
Test date of URL
Examination date of dissertation
Method of financing
Comment on publication
Alliance license
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
International Co-Authors
Bibliography of Konstanz
Yes
Refereed
Yes