Novel assessment of risk tolerance in acute healthcare settings: a questionnaire-based study investigating risk tolerance of service users and staff in ambulatory care and front-door services

Objectives: When deciding acute healthcare delivery location, multiple factors should be considered, including risks associated with potential care locations and the willingness of decision stakeholders to take those risks. Individual risk tolerance potentially informs these choices. We therefore aimed to investigate the risk tolerance of staff, patients and carers in front-door and ambulatory care units. Design: Several variants of the ‘multiple price list’ method of risk tolerance assessment were employed. The different variants covered financial and health outcomes, and known and unknown odds in the ‘risky’ options. For financial outcomes, participants made seven choices between a guaranteed (eg, £70) and risky (eg, chance of £20 or £160) outcome, with the higher quantity in the risky outcome increasing with each choice, in six ‘lottery sets’. For health outcomes, participants made choices between a guaranteed and risky outcome measured in number of healthy days. Setting and participants: Staff, patients and carers were recruited from front-door and ambulatory care units in the UK. Outcome measures: Risk tolerance was the primary outcome measure and was established in two ways—number of times the guaranteed option was chosen, and the point where participants switched from the guaranteed to the risky option. Results: Among 338 participants, a wide range of risk tolerance levels were demonstrated, and three key findings were identified—participants were less risk tolerant in health-based than financial decisions; older people had a more dichotomised approach to health risk-taking than younger people; and patients could engage in informed, structured discussions about risk, including when acutely unwell. Conclusions: These findings suggest that, while stakeholders in location-of-care decisions may have different risk tolerance levels, they can engage in structured discussions about risk, which should inform shared decision-making. Additionally, older patients, who constitute a significant proportion of hospital attendees, may be more willing to take health-based risks than younger people. Future work may benefit from formal exploration of people’s rationale for their decisions and may be considered in other clinical settings.