Desirable Pharmaceutical Care Services in Thai Traditional Medical Cannabis Clinic: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Main Article Content

Thitikan Siripakornkan
Nusaraporn Kessomboon
Wannee Chaichalermpong
Sukunta Muadthong

Abstract

Objective: To study the attributes of pharmaceutical services in Thai traditional medical cannabis clinic (TTMCC) that the patients were satisfied with. Method: The researcher interviewed 20 patients at Udonthani Cancer Hospital to determine the attributes related to the decision to use TTMCC services. Subsequently, the attributes were used to design a questionnaire as a tool for discrete choice experiment (DCE) using a packaged program. A pilot study of 30 patients was conducted to determine the coefficients of each attribute for developing the questionnaire for DCE in the main study. The participants were selected by accidental sampling. The study analyzed data from 200 inpatients at Udonthani Cancer Hospital passing the test for internal validity, comprising 170 outpatients and 30 inpatients. Results: Data from the interview revealed four attributes related to the use of TTMCC services including privacy in receiving services, days and times of service provision from the clinic, time for pharmacist consultation and channel to contact pharmacists. The main study found the volunteers were interested in receiving services from the TTMCC and all 4 attributes had a statistically significant effect on the service use at 0.05 level. The volunteers had the highest satisfaction with the 20-minute consultation time with the pharmacist, followed by using phone call or LINE application to contact a pharmacist when the patients needed a consultation or reporting the problem, receiving services individually, and the clinic should be open every day and during office hours. Conclusion: Patients at Udonthani Cancer Hospital were interested in receiving pharmaceutical services in the TTMCC. Relevant party could apply attributes found in the study to develop a service model in TTMCC that is desirable from a patient perspective.

Article Details

Section
Research Articles

References

Atakan Z. Cannabis, a complex plant: different compounds and different effects on individuals. Ther Adv Psychopharmacol 2012; 2: 241–54.

Klimkiewicz A, Jasinska A. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids. Psychiatria 2018; 15: 88–92.

Aviram J, Samuelly-Leichtag G. Efficacy of cannabis-based medicines for pain management: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Pain physician 2017; 20: 755–96.

Landschaft Y, Albo B, Mechoulam R, Afek A. Medical grade cannabis clinical guide. Israeli: Ministry of Health; 2017.

Cannabis Access Clinics. Medicinal cannabis Australia [online]. 2022 [cited Mar 7, 2020]. Available from: cannabisaccessclinics.com.au/

Committee for the Promotion of Medical Marijuana Use, Ministry of Health. Medical cannabis [online]. 2021 [cited Sep 16, 2021]. Available from: www. medcannabis.go.th/

Department of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine. A guide to establishing a Thai traditional medicinal cannabis clinic in a health care. Nontha- buri: Ministry of Public Health; 2020.

McFadden D. The choice theory approach to market research. Marketing Sci 1986; 5: 275-97.

Johnson FR, Yang JC, Reed SD. The internal validity of discrete choice experiment data: A testing tool for quantitative assessments. Value Health 2019; 22: 157–60.

Sawetrattanasatian O. Think aloud technique and information system research. Asian J Soc Sci 2013; 19: 161-87.

Hauber AB, González JM, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, Prior T, Marshall DA, Cunningham C, et al. Statistical methods for the analysis of discrete choice experiments: A report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health 2016; 19: 300–15.

ChoiceMetrics. NGene.1.1.1 user manual and reference guide. Online: ChoiceMetrics; 2012.

World Health Organization. How to conduct a discrete choice experiment for health workforce recruitment and retention in remote and rural areas: a user guide with case studies [online]. 2013 [cited Sep 16, 2021]. Available from: www.capacityplus. org/files/resources/discrete-choice-experiment-user-guide.pdf.

Bassford CR, Krucien N, Ryan M, Griffiths FE, Svantesson M, Fritz Z, et al. U.K. intensivists’s preferences for patient admission to ICU: evidence from a choice experiment. J Clin Investing 2019; 47: 1522-30.

Bridges JFP, Hauber AB, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser LA, Regier DA, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health - A checklist: A report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health 2011; 14: 403–13.

Pradubmook PS, Wongupparaj P. Situation of alternative medicine, Thai traditional medicine, and folk medicine utilization in Thailand. Bangkok: Department of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine; 2009.

Sukontharos O, Philaton V, Muadthaisong S, Udomphol S. Hospital based cancer registry. Udonthani: Udonthani Cancer Hospital; 2020.

Presley B, Groot W, Pavlova M. Pharmacists' preferences for the provision of services to improve medication adherence among patients with diabetes in Indonesia: Results of a discrete choice experiment. Health Soc Care Community 2022; 30:161–74.

Kaambwa B, Ratcliffe J, Shulver W, Killington M, Taylor A, Crotty M, et al. investigating the preferences of older people for telehealth as a new model of health care service delivery: A discrete choice experiment. J Telemed Telecare. 2016; 23: 301–13.