Patient weighting of osteoporosis medication attributes across racial and ethnic groups: a study of osteoporosis medication preferences using conjoint analysis

Determining patient preferences for the medical management of osteoporosis using conjoint analysis

We used conjoint analysis-a method that assesses complex decision making-to quantify patients' choices when selecting an osteoporosis therapy. While 60% of people prioritized medication efficacy when deciding among treatments, the remaining 40% highly valued factors other than efficacy, suggesting the need for personalized shared decision-making tools.

INTRODUCTION

In this study, we aimed to examine patient decision-making surrounding osteoporosis medications using conjoint analysis.

METHODS

We enrolled osteoporosis patients at an academic medical center to complete an online conjoint exercise which calculated each patient's relative importance score of 6 osteoporosis medication attributes (higher = greater relative importance in decision-making). We used latent class analysis to identify distinct segments of patients with similar choice patterns and then used logistic regression to determine if demographics and osteoporosis disease features were associated with latent class assignment.

RESULTS

Overall, 304 participants completed the survey. The rank order of medication attributes by importance score was the following: efficacy at preventing hip fractures (accounted for 31.0% of decision making), mode of administration (17.5%); risk of serious side effects (16.6%); dose frequency (13.9%); efficacy at preventing spine fractures (12.5%); risk of non-serious side effects (8.4%). We found that 60.9% of the cohort prioritized medication efficacy as their top factor when selecting among the therapies. Being a college graduate, having stronger beliefs on the necessity of using medications for osteoporosis, and never having used osteoporosis medicines were the only factors associated with prioritizing medication efficacy for fracture prevention over the other factors in the decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

While about 60% of patients prioritized efficacy when selecting an osteoporosis therapy, the remaining 40% valued other factors more highly. Furthermore, individual patient characteristics and clinical factors did not reliably predict patient decision making, suggesting that development and implementation of shared decision-making tools is warranted.

Treatment thresholds and minimal clinically important effect sizes of antiosteoporotic medication–Survey among physicians and lay persons in Germany

Background

Patient decisions to take preventative treatments for osteoporosis depend on their perceptions of fracture risk, medication effect sizes (ES) of benefits and harms. However, physicians and lay persons may have differing perceptions of risks and medication efficacy. Both tend to overestimate medication benefits. This study surveyed at what risk physicians would prescribe and lay persons would be willing to take bisphosphonates, the minimum ES both groups do demand and the physicians estimates of the actual benefit of bisphosphonates.

Design

Cross-sectional online questionnaire survey.

Methods

Respondents were confronted with a case vignette with an osteoporotic patient (10-year femoral fracture risk: 32%). They were asked at what threshold of 10-year-risk of femoral neck fracture they would prescribe or take a drug. They were asked for the minimum ES (absolute risk reduction, ARR) they demand from bisphosphonates to prescribe or take them. Physicians were asked to provide their estimate of the actual ARR of bisphosphonates.

Results

114 physicians and 140 lay persons answered (convenience sample/snowball distribution). The 10-year-risk threshold of lay persons (Mdn_lay = 60%) willing to take medication was twice as high as the physicians’ threshold (Mdn_phy = 30%) to prescribe it (p < .001). The median minimum ARR physicians demanded for bisphosphonates prescription was 17%, whereas lay persons demanded 22% (p < .001). Physicians estimated the actual ARR of bisphosphonates to be 12%. This estimated effect size was below their own minimum threshold for prescription.

Conclusions

Lay persons tolerate a higher fracture risk and demand a larger benefit of antiosteoporotic medication for fracture prevention than physicians. Physicians demand higher minimum benefits than their own estimates which in turn are above the benefit evidence suggests. Physicians should be more familiar with ES of antiosteoporotic drugs concerning patient outcomes and actively advise lay persons before preventive treatment decisions are taken.

A Qualitative Study to Assess US Patient Preferences between new Transdermal System and Injectable Anabolic Therapies for Osteoporosis Treatment

US patients with osteoporosis included in three focus groups identified efficacy, safety, cost, and convenience as important attributes of treatment when choosing between anabolic therapies with high stated preference for the solid Microstructured Transdermal System.

OBJECTIVE

The current study evaluated patient perspective and relative importance of treatment attributes of in-home daily self-administration of abaloparatide-solid Microstructured Transdermal System (sMTS) compared with other anabolic agents (i.e. in-home daily subcutaneous self-injections, and monthly subcutaneous injections at doctor office) among a group of US patients with osteoporosis.

METHODS

The current study included systematic literature reviews, experts' consultation and three online patients focus groups (n=27), including patients ≥50 years of age at high risk for fracture. Nominal Group Technique was used by asking patients to (1) Individually identify characteristics that would be important for them when choosing between anabolic treatments, (2) Share ideas and discuss perspectives with other patients, (3) Review additional attributes generated from a systematic literature review, (4) Select and rank individually the 7 most important characteristics from the list and (5) Report their acceptability and stated preference ranking between the three treatment options.

RESULTS

Twenty women and 7 men with a mean age of 65 (range 51-85 years) participated in the focus groups. Twenty-four treatment characteristics were identified through focus groups and literature review. Efficacy, safety, out-of-pocket costs, strength of evidence and the option to self-administer were ranked as the most important attributes. The majority of patients stated preference for a daily sMTS if prescribed by their doctor.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that efficacy, safety, costs, and convenience are important attributes of osteoporosis treatment for US patients at high risk for fractures when choosing between anabolic therapies, with a high stated preference for sMTS.

Development of an Electronic Tool to Assess Patient Preferences in Geriatric Polypharmacy (PolyPref)

PURPOSE

Medical decision-making in older adults with multiple chronic conditions and polypharmacy should include the individual patient's treatment preferences. We developed and pilot-tested an electronic instrument (PolyPref) to elicit patient preferences in geriatric polypharmacy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PolyPref follows a two-stage direct approach to preference assessment. Stage 1 generates an individual preselection of relevant health outcomes and medication regimen characteristics, followed by stage 2, in which their importance is assessed using the Q-sort methodology. The feasibility of the instrument was tested in adults aged ≥70 years with ≥2 chronic conditions and regular intake of ≥5 medicines. After the assessment with PolyPref, the patients rated the tool with regard to its comprehensibility and usability and assessed the accuracy of the personal result. Evaluators rated the patients' understanding of the task.

RESULTS

Eighteen short-term health outcomes, 3 long-term health outcomes, and 8 medication regimen characteristics were included in the instrument. The final population for the pilot study comprised 15 inpatients at a clinic for geriatric rehabilitation with a mean age of 80.6 (± 6.0) years, a median score of 28 (range 25-30) points on the Mini-Mental State Examination, and a mean of 11.6 (± 3.6) regularly taken medicines. Feedback by the patients and the evaluators revealed ratings in favor of understanding and comprehensibility of 86.7% to 100%. The majority of the patients stated that their final result summarized the most important aspects of their pharmacotherapy (93.3%) and that its ranking order reflected their personal opinion (100%). Preference assessment took an average of 35 (± 8.5) min, with the instrument being handled by the evaluator in 14 of the 15 participants.

CONCLUSION

Preference assessment with PolyPref was feasible in older adults with multiple chronic conditions and polypharmacy, offering a new strategy for the standardized evaluation of patient priorities in geriatric pharmacotherapy.

Preferences, satisfaction and decision-making processes in osteoporosis treatment: a systematic review of the literature

Aim: To synthesize information available in the literature on patients' preferences and satisfaction with osteoporosis treatment and their unmet needs on the treatment decision-making process. Materials & methods: Systematic literature review consulting international database and grey literature of articles published between January 1, 2009 and January 1, 2019. Results: Nineteen publications were reviewed, 79% of them focused on evaluating the importance that patients attached to the mode and frequency of administration, adverse events and treatment efficacy. 21% of them provided information about treatment satisfaction and 26% regarding unmet needs on treatment-decision making process. Conclusion: Aligning treatment with patients' preferences, promoting physician-patient communication and identifying patients' concerns with treatment may contribute to improve treatment satisfaction and adherence and ultimately achieve the treatment goal.

Methods to Assess Patient Preferences in Old Age Pharmacotherapy - A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to identify methods used to assess medication preferences in older adults and evaluate their advantages and disadvantages with respect to their applicability to the context of multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO) were searched. Eligible studies elicited individual treatment or outcome preferences in a context that involved long-term pharmacological treatment options. We included studies with a study population aged ≥ 65 years and/or with a mean or median age of ≥ 75 years. Qualitative studies, studies assessing preferences for only two different treatments, and studies targeting preferences for life-sustaining treatments were excluded. The identified preference measurement methods were evaluated based on four criteria (time budget, cognitive demand, variety of pharmacological aspects, and link with treatment strategies) judged to be relevant for the elicitation of patient preferences in polypharmacy.

RESULTS

Sixty articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in the narrative synthesis. Fifty-five different instruments to assess patient preferences, based on 24 different elicitation methods, were identified. The most commonly applied preference measurement techniques were "medication willingness" (description of a specific medication with inquiry of the participant's willingness to take it), discrete choice experiments, Likert scale-based questionnaires, and rank prioritization. The majority of the instruments were created for disease-specific or context-specific settings. Only three instruments (Outcome Prioritization Tool, a complex intervention, "MediMol" questionnaire) dealt with the broader issue of geriatric multimorbidity. Only seven of the identified tools showed somewhat favorable characteristics for a potential use of the respective method in the context of polypharmacy.

CONCLUSION

Up to now, few instruments have been specifically designed for the assessment of medication preferences in older patients with multimorbidity. To facilitate valid preference elicitation in the context of geriatric polypharmacy, future research should focus on suitable characteristics of existing techniques to develop new measurement approaches for this increasingly relevant population.

Association between Bone Mineral Density and Severity of Chronic Kidney Disease

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the association between femoral neck (FN) and lumbar spine (LS) bone mineral densities (BMDs) with severity of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and prevalence of osteopenia or osteoporosis (OP) among the CKD group.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data from 11050 participants aged ≥20 years from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were analyzed. Specifically, Pearson correlation was applied to analyze the relationship between BMD and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). General linear models (GLMs) were adjusted for potential confounders and used to analyze mean BMD, based on CKD and CKD stages.

RESULTS

FN BMD was positively correlated with the eGFR in the total and male CKD, but not in the female CKD population. LS BMD was not significantly associated with eGFR. After controlling for partial correlations, FN T-score was positively correlated with the eGFR in the total at-risk population. According to FN BMD, OP prevalence was positively associated with CKD stage. However, according to LS BMD, there was no significant association between OP and CKD stage.

CONCLUSION

Our results may explain the higher prevalence of hip fracture, relative to that of the spine, among CKD patients and generate meaningful insights to guide care, prevention, and treatment regimens for CKD patients. However, the fact that this was a cross-sectional study may limit the possibility of drawing concrete conclusions. Nevertheless, these findings open up a new frontier for further studies to uncover the higher decrease of FN BMD compared to LS BMD among CKD cases.

Patient Preferences for Biologic and Biosimilar Osteoporosis Treatments in Colombia

PURPOSE

Teriparatide is used to treat patients with established osteoporosis but is often reserved for patients who have inadequate response to antiresorptive therapy. Biosimilar teriparatide, which is believed to have efficacy and safety similar to the originator product, is now available in Colombia. However, little is known about patients' preferences for originator biologic and biosimilar treatments. Our objective was to quantify the relative importance that patients in Colombia place on features of injectable osteoporosis treatments including whether the treatment is an originator biologic or a biosimilar.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit preferences of patients with osteoporosis treatment devices in Colombia. The survey was completed by 200 respondents at high risk of fracture, with or without teriparatide experience. Each treatment alternative within the DCE was characterized by five attributes: type of medicine (originator biologic, biosimilar), needle length, angle of injection, how to measure the medicine dose, and how long the medicine can be left unrefrigerated. A random parameters logit regression was used to estimate preferences and conditional relative attribute importance, while controlling for preference heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients (mean age = 58.3 years) completed the survey. Most were female (84.5%) and married (54.5%); 50.5% had secondary education or less, 21% had current teriparatide exposure. The attribute with the highest conditional relative importance estimate (standard error) was biologic versus biosimilar (10 [1.11]), followed by needle length (8.06 [1.11]), dose measurement (6.38 [0.87]), refrigeration (3.81 [1.18]), and angle of injection (1.30 [0.66]). Unobserved preference heterogeneity was present and controlled for in the analyses.

CONCLUSION

Despite the availability of biosimilar teriparatide in Colombia, patients expressed a strong preference for an originator biologic osteoporosis medicine over a biosimilar osteoporosis medicine, when the efficacy, safety, and cost of the two options were assumed to be the same.

Understanding patients' preferences for osteoporosis treatment: the impact of patients' characteristics on subgroups and latent classes

This study revealed patterns in osteoporosis patients' treatment preferences, which cannot be related to socio-demographic or clinical characteristics, implicating unknown underlying reasons. Therefore, to improve quality of care and treatment, patients should have an active role in treatment choice, irrespective of their characteristics.

INTRODUCTION

Patient centeredness is important to improve the quality of care. Accounting for patient preferences is a key element of patient centeredness, and understanding preferences are important for successful and adherent treatment. This study was designed to identify different preferences profiles and to investigate how patient characteristics influence treatment preferences of patients for anti-osteoporosis drugs.

METHODS

Data from a discrete choice experiment among 188 osteoporotic patients were used. The hypothetical treatment options were characterized by three attributes: treatment efficacy, side effects, and mode/frequency of administration. A mixed logit model was used to measure heterogeneity across the sample. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify potential effect of patient characteristics. Latent class modeling (LCM) was applied. Associations between patients' characteristics and the identified latent classes were explored with chi-square.

RESULTS

All treatment options were important for patients' decision regarding osteoporotic treatment. Significant heterogeneity was observed for most attributes. Subgroup analyses revealed that patients with a previous fracture valued efficacy most, and patients with a fear of needles or aged > 65 years preferred oral tablets. Elderly patients disliked intravenous medication. Three latent classes were identified, in which 6-month subcutaneous injection was preferred in two classes (86%), while oral tablets were preferred in the third class (14%). No statistically significant associations between the profiles regarding socio-demographic or clinical characteristics could be found.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed patterns in patients' preferences for osteoporosis treatment, which cannot be related to specific socio-demographic or clinical characteristics. Therefore, patients should be involved in clinical decision-making to reveal their preferences.

Medication Decision-making in Osteoporosis: Can We Explain Why Patients Do Not Take Their Osteoporosis Medications?

Patients at high risk of fracture often do not take medication for osteoporosis. Recent literature may give us some insights into why patients at high risk of fracture do not take medications for osteoporosis.

Factors and situations influencing the value of patient preference studies along the medical product lifecycle: a literature review

Industry, regulators, health technology assessment (HTA) bodies, and payers are exploring the use of patient preferences in their decision-making processes. In general, experience in conducting and assessing patient preference studies is limited. Here, we performed a systematic literature search and review to identify factors and situations influencing the value of patient preference studies, as well as applications throughout the medical product lifecyle. Factors and situations identified in 113 publications related to the organization, design, and conduct of studies, and to communication and use of results. Although current use of patient preferences is limited, we identified possible applications in discovery, clinical development, marketing authorization, HTA, and postmarketing phases.

Understanding patients' preferences for surgical management of urethral stricture disease

OBJECTIVES

To understand how prioritization of treatment attributes and treatment choice varies by patient characteristics, we sought to specifically determine how demographic variables affect patient treatment preference.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Male patients with urethral stricture disease participated in a choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis exercise evaluating six treatment attributes associated with internal urethrotomy and urethroplasty. Demographic and past symptom data were collected. Stratified analysis of demographic variables, including age, education, income, was conducted using a mixed effect logistic regression model to evaluate the coefficient size and confidence intervals between the treatments attribute preferences of each strata.

RESULTS

169 patients completed the CBC exercise and were included in our analysis. Overall success of the procedure is the most important treatment attribute to patients and this persists across strata. Older patients (≥65) express preferences for better success rates and fewer future procedures, whereas younger patients prefer a less invasive approach and are more willing to accept additional procedures if needed. Patients with lower levels of education preferred open reconstruction and had a stronger preference against multiple future procedures, whereas those with higher levels of education preferred endoscopic treatment and had a less strong preference against multiple future procedures. Low-income individuals express statistically significant stronger negative preferences against high copay costs compared to high-income individuals.

CONCLUSION

These results can help to inform physicians' counseling about surgical management of urethral stricture disease to better align patient preferences with treatment selection and encourage shared decision making.

Patients' preferences for anti-osteoporosis drug treatment: a cross-European discrete choice experiment

Objectives

To estimate the preferences of osteoporotic patients for medication attributes, and analyse data from seven European countries.

Methods

A discrete choice experiment was conducted in Belgium, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland and the UK. Patients were asked to choose repeatedly between two hypothetical unlabelled drug treatments (and an opt-out option) that varied with respect to four attributes: efficacy in reducing the risk of fracture, type of potential common side effects, and mode and frequency of administration. In those countries in which patients contribute to the cost of their treatment directly, a fifth attribute was added: out-of-pocket cost. A mixed logit panel model was used to estimate patients' preferences.

Results

In total, 1124 patients completed the experiment, with a sample of between 98 and 257 patients per country. In all countries, patients preferred treatment with higher effectiveness, and 6-monthly subcutaneous injection was always preferred over weekly oral tablets. In five countries, patients also preferred a monthly oral tablet and yearly i.v. injections over weekly oral tablets. In the three countries where the out-of-pocket cost was included as an attribute, lower costs significantly contributed to the treatment preference. Between countries, there were statistically significant differences for 13 out of 42 attribute/level interactions.

Conclusion

We found statistically significant differences in patients' preferences for anti-osteoporosis medications between countries, especially for the mode of administration. Our findings emphasized that international treatment recommendations should allow for local adaptation, and that understanding individual preferences is important if we want to improve the quality of clinical care for patients with osteoporosis.

The importance of physical function to people with osteoporosis

There is increasing need to understand patient outcomes in osteoporosis. This article discusses that fracture in osteoporosis can lead to a cycle of impairment, driven by complex psychosocial factors, having a profound impact on physical function/activity which accumulates over time. More information is required on how treatments impact physical function.

INTRODUCTION

There is increasing need to understand patient-centred outcomes in osteoporosis (OP) clinical research and management. This multi-method paper provides insight on the effect of OP on patients' physical function and everyday activity.

METHODS

Data were collected from three sources: (1) targeted literature review on OP and physical function, conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO; (2) secondary thematic analysis of transcripts from patient interviews, conducted to develop a patient-reported outcome instrument. Transcripts were re-coded to focus on OP impact on daily activities and physical function for those with and without fracture history; and (3) discussions of the literature review and secondary qualitative analysis results with three clinical experts to review and interpret the importance and implications of the findings.

RESULTS

Results suggest that OP, particularly with fracture, can have profound impacts on physical function/activity. These impacts accumulate over time through a cycle of impairment, as fracture leads to longer term detriments in physical function, including loss of muscle, activity avoidance and reduced physical capacity, which in turn leads to greater risk of fracture and potential for further physical restrictions. The cycle of impairment is complex, as other physical, psychosocial and treatment-related factors, such as comorbidities, fears and beliefs about physical activity and fracture risk influence physical function and everyday activity.

CONCLUSION

More information on how treatments impact physical function would benefit healthcare professionals and persons with OP in making treatment decisions and improving treatment compliance/persistence, as these impacts may be more salient to patients than fracture incidence.

Survey of Preferences in Patients Scheduled for Carpal Tunnel Release Using Conjoint Analysis

Background

This study aimed to investigate the preferences of patients scheduled for carpal tunnel release using conjoint analysis and also introduce an example of how to apply a conjoint analysis to the medical field. The use of conjoint analysis in this study is new to the field of orthopedic surgery.

Methods

A total of 97 patients scheduled for carpal tunnel release completed the survey. The following four attributes were predefined: board certification status, distance from the patient's residency, medical costs, and waiting time for surgery. Two plausible levels for each attribute were assigned. Based on these attributes and levels, 16 scenarios were generated (2 × 2 × 2 × 2). We employed 8 scenarios using a fractional factorial design (orthogonal plan). Preferences for scenarios were then evaluated by ranking: patients were asked to list the 8 scenarios in their order of preference. Outcomes consisted of two results: the average importance of each attribute and the utility score.

Results

The most important attribute was the physician's board certificate, followed by distance from the patient's residency to the hospital, waiting time, and costs. Utility estimate findings revealed that patients had a greater preference for a hand specialist than a general orthopedic surgeon.

Conclusions

Patients considered the physician's expertise as the most important factor when choosing a hospital for carpal tunnel release. This suggests that patients are increasingly seeking safety without complications as interest in medical malpractice has increased.

Use of Conjoint Analysis to Determine Patient Preferences for Surgical Treatment of Urethral Stricture Disease

INTRODUCTION

Understanding patient preferences for characteristics of treatments facilitates patient participation and doctor-patient communication and enhances patient-centered care. Patient participation is especially important for urethral stricture disease, which has no definitive treatment guidelines favoring either endoscopic incision or open reconstruction, making patient preference an important factor in treatment choice. However, to date, there have been no studies assessing factors that patients value when choosing a treatment option.

METHODS

We employ choice-based conjoint analysis to assess patient preferences in the trade-offs of treatment attributes for urethral stricture disease. Male patients undergoing treatment or follow-up examination for urethral stricture disease were recruited through a University Medical Practice. We included 169 patients in the analysis. Six attributes of both risk and benefit were examined: treatment type, success rate, number of future procedures, post-treatment catheter duration, recovery time, and copayment amount.

RESULTS

The treatment success rate was by far the most important attribute. Relative to a 25% success rate (OR = 1) an 85% success rate (OR = 26.72, p<.01) increased patient preference by approximately 27 times. Furthermore, patients are willing to pay a $10,000 copayment to double the success rate from 25% to 50%. Patients demonstrated a strong aversion to time with a urinary catheter. Catheter duration for 1 week or less (OR = .67, p<.01) reduced patient preference by about 1.5 times when compared to requiring no catheter. We also found that patients place low importance on both how invasive the treatment seems and low copayment amounts but are willing to pay $10,000 copayment for an open reconstruction surgery compared with an endoscopic incision procedure.

CONCLUSION

The findings highlight the importance of shared and detailed physician/patient discussions of all the risk and benefits of each treatment choice and suggest that conjoint analysis may be helpful as a decision aid to guide discussions with individual patients deciding on a treatment.

Patient-centered Treatment Decisions for Urethral Stricture: Conjoint Analysis Improves Surgical Decision-making

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the use of a choice-based conjoint analysis (CA) exercise decreased patients' decisional conflict about treatment preferences for surgical management of urethral stricture disease. Understanding patient preferences for treatment decisions assists in shared decision-making and emphasizes patient-centered outcomes. CA offers a method to understand what risks patients are willing to take for what gains.

METHODS

The CA methodology was used by providing participants with case-based choices to elucidate the relative importance that individuals place on various treatment aspects. Patients' decisional conflict regarding surgery for urethral stricture was assessed before and after the CA exercise to assess the impact the exercise had on their decisional conflict.

RESULTS

Completion of the CA exercise resulted in a significant decrease in decisional conflict (P < .001). The majority (59.5%) of participants with decisional conflict before the CA exercise experienced a decrease in decisional conflict afterwards, with only a minority (16.5%) experiencing new decisional conflict after the exercise. Participants felt the choice-based CA exercise was helpful in deciding what was important in making treatment decisions (70%) and in expressing their priorities and treatment preferences (82%). The number needed to counsel to achieve a decrease in decisional conflict was 1.69 and to achieve no decisional conflict was 3.65.

CONCLUSION

Choice-based CA improves patients' ability to express their treatment preferences and decreases decisional conflict. CA may be a new tool that physicians and patients can use to aid in shared decision-making with a focus on patient-centered outcomes.

Using Best-Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care

INTRODUCTION

Best-worst scaling (BWS) is becoming increasingly popular to elicit preferences in health care. However, little is known about current practice and trends in the use of BWS in health care. This study aimed to identify, review and critically appraise BWS in health care, and to identify trends over time in key aspects of BWS.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted, using Medline (via Pubmed) and EMBASE to identify all English-language BWS studies published up until April 2016. Using a predefined extraction form, two reviewers independently selected articles and critically appraised the study quality, using the Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, Significance (PREFS) checklist. Trends over time periods (≤2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015) were assessed further.

RESULTS

A total of 62 BWS studies were identified, of which 26 were BWS object case studies, 29 were BWS profile case studies and seven were BWS multi-profile case studies. About two thirds of the studies were performed in the last 2 years. Decreasing sample sizes and decreasing numbers of factors in BWS object case studies, as well as use of less complicated analytical methods, were observed in recent studies. The quality of the BWS studies was generally acceptable according to the PREFS checklist, except that most studies did not indicate whether the responders were similar to the non-responders.

CONCLUSION

Use of BWS object case and BWS profile case has drastically increased in health care, especially in the last 2 years. In contrast with previous discrete-choice experiment reviews, there is increasing use of less sophisticated analytical methods.

A Review of Patient Preferences for Osteoporosis Drug Treatment

Poor medication adherence is a major problem in chronic diseases such as osteoporosis that may partially be due to unaddressed patient values and preferences. Data on patient preferences could help clinicians to improve medication adherence and could also be useful in policy decisions and guideline development. This paper aims to identify literature reporting on the preferences of patients for osteoporosis drug medications. Several methods have been used to elicit patient preferences for medications and their characteristics including qualitative research, survey with ranking/rating exercises, discrete-choice experiments and clinical studies (crossover designs, open-label study). All these studies revealed that osteoporotic patients have preferences for medications and their attributes, in particular for less-frequent dosing regimens. Interestingly, variations in the preferences of patients were observed in most studies, suggesting the importance to take into account individual preference in decision-making to improve osteoporosis care.

Preference for pharmaceutical formulation and treatment process attributes

PURPOSE

Pharmaceutical formulation and treatment process attributes, such as dose frequency and route of administration, can have an impact on quality of life, treatment adherence, and disease outcomes. The aim of this literature review was to examine studies on preferences for pharmaceutical treatment process attributes, focusing on research in diabetes, oncology, osteoporosis, and autoimmune disorders.

METHODS

The literature search focused on identifying studies reporting preferences for attributes of the pharmaceutical treatment process. Studies were required to use formal quantitative preference assessment methods, such as utility valuation, conjoint analysis, or contingent valuation. Searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Health Economic Evaluation Database, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (January 1993-October 2013).

RESULTS

A total of 42 studies met inclusion criteria: 19 diabetes, nine oncology, five osteoporosis, and nine autoimmune. Across these conditions, treatments associated with shorter treatment duration, less frequent administration, greater flexibility, and less invasive routes of administration were preferred over more burdensome or complex treatments. While efficacy and safety often had greater relative importance than treatment process, treatment process also had a quantifiable impact on preference. In some instances, particularly in diabetes and autoimmune disorders, treatment process attributes had greater relative importance than some or all efficacy and safety attributes. Some studies suggested that relative importance of treatment process depends on disease (eg, acute vs chronic) and patient (eg, injection experience) characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Despite heterogeneity in study methods and design, some general patterns of preference clearly emerged. Overall, the results of this review suggest that treatment process has a quantifiable impact on preference and willingness to pay for treatment, even in many situations where safety and efficacy were the primary concerns. Patient preferences for treatment process attributes can inform drug development decisions to better meet the needs of patients and deliver improved outcomes.

Evaluating preferences for profiles of GLP-1 receptor agonists among injection-naïve type 2 diabetes patients in the UK

OBJECTIVE

To use a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to evaluate preferences for the actual treatment features and overall profiles of two injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (dulaglutide and liraglutide) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the UK.

METHODS

In-person interviews were conducted in the UK to administer a DCE to patients with self-reported T2DM, naïve to treatment with injectable medications. The DCE examined six attributes of T2DM treatment each described by two levels: "dosing frequency," "hemoglobin A1c change," "weight change," "type of delivery system," "frequency of nausea," and "frequency of hypoglycemia." Part-worth utilities were estimated using random effects logit models and were used to calculate relative importance (RI) values for each attribute. A chi-square test was used to determine differences in preferences for dulaglutide versus liraglutide profiles.

RESULTS

A total of 243 participants [mean age: 60.5 (standard deviation 10.9) years; 76.1% male; mean body mass index: 29.8 (standard deviation 5.4) kg/m(2)] completed the study. RI values for the attributes in rank order were: "dosing frequency" (41.6%), "type of delivery system" (35.5%), "frequency of nausea" (10.4%), "weight change" (5.9%), "hemoglobin A1c change" (3.6%), and "frequency of hypoglycemia" (3.0%). Significantly more participants preferred the dulaglutide profile (83.1%) compared with the liraglutide profile (16.9%; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This study elicited patients' preferences for attributes and levels representing the actual characteristics of two specific glucagon-like peptide-1 medications. In this context, dosing frequency and type of delivery system were most important, accounting for over 75% of the RI. While previous studies have identified efficacy as highly important in T2DM medication decisions, this study suggests that when differences in efficacy between medications are small, other treatment features (eg, dosing frequency and delivery system) are of much greater importance to patients.

Long-term persistence and switching patterns among women using osteoporosis therapies: 24- and 36-month results from POSSIBLE US™

Persistence with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) medications is not well characterized beyond 12 months. Of 3,011 postmenopausal women treated in primary care, 36.8 % continued baseline PMO medication during 36 months of follow-up. Many factors were associated with nonpersistence, including newly initiating or switching therapy, and reporting moderate to severe side effects.

INTRODUCTION

Persistence with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) medications is not well characterized beyond 12 months. We describe 24- and 36-month persistence using patient-reported data from women with different PMO treatment histories in the US primary care setting.

METHODS

Data from 3,011 participants of the Prospective Observational Scientific Study Investigating Bone Loss Experience (POSSIBLE US™, 10/2005-12/2008) and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate the probability of persisting (i.e., not discontinuing or switching PMO agents) with baseline PMO medication and hazard ratios for predictors of nonpersistence 24 and 36 months after study entry.

RESULTS

The probability of persisting with the baseline medication was 46.2 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 44.2-48.1 %) during 24 months of follow-up and 36.8 % (95 % CI 34.7-38.9 %) during 36 months of follow-up. In adjusted analyses, newly initiating therapy or switching to a new agent, reporting moderate to severe side effects, having lower disease-specific quality of life scores, smoking, and residing in the South or West USA (all measured at study entry) were independent predictors of nonpersistence in both time periods. The majority of participants who discontinued therapy and had the opportunity to reinitiate (i.e., discontinued ≥4 months before the end of follow-up) restarted therapy (24 months 69 %; 36 months 75 %).

CONCLUSIONS

In this primary care cohort, a minority of women continued their baseline PMO therapy during a 24- to 36-month follow-up. Supporting patients during the initiation of a new therapy or if side effects occur may improve persistence and increase the therapeutic benefit of PMO medications.

A descriptive review on methods to prioritize outcomes in a health care context

BACKGROUND

Evidence synthesis has seen major methodological advances in reducing uncertainty and estimating the sizes of the effects. Much less is known about how to assess the relative value of different outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To identify studies that assessed preferences for outcomes in health conditions.

METHODS

SEARCH STRATEGY

we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library in February 2014.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

eligible studies investigated preferences of patients, family members, the general population or healthcare professionals for health outcomes. The intention of this review was to include studies which focus on theoretical alternatives; studies which assessed preferences for distinct treatments were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

study characteristics as study objective, health condition, participants, elicitation method, and outcomes assessed in the study were extracted.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-four studies were identified and categorized into four groups: (1) multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA) (n = 71), (2) rating or ranking (n = 25), (3) utility eliciting (n = 5) and (4) studies comparing different methods (n = 23). The number of outcomes assessed by method group varied. The comparison of different methods or subgroups within one study often resulted in different hierarchies of outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

A dominant method most suitable for application in evidence syntheses was not identified. As preferences of patients differ from those of other stakeholders (especially medical professionals), the choice of the group to be questioned is consequential. Further research needs to focus on validity and applicability of the identified methods.

Patients' preferences for osteoporosis drug treatment: a discrete-choice experiment

Introduction

The patient’s perspective is becoming increasingly important in clinical and policy decisions. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the preferences of patients with, or at risk of, osteoporosis for medication attributes, and to establish how patients trade between these attributes.

Methods

A discrete choice experiment survey was designed and patients were asked to choose between two hypothetical unlabelled drug treatments (and an opt-out option) that vary in five attributes: efficacy in reducing the risk of fracture, type of potential common side-effects, mode and frequency of administration and out-of-pocket costs. An efficient experimental design was used to construct the treatment option choice sets and a mixed logit panel data model was used to estimate patients’ preferences and trade-offs between attributes.

Results

A total of 257 patients with, or at risk of, osteoporosis completed the experiment. As expected, patients preferred treatment with higher effectiveness and lower cost. They also preferred either an oral monthly tablet or 6-month subcutaneous injection above weekly oral tablets, 3-month subcutaneous, 3-month intravenous or yearly intravenous injections. Patients disliked being at risk of gastro-intestinal disorders more than being at risk of skin reactions and flu-like symptoms. There was significant variation in preferences across the sample for all attributes except subcutaneous injection.

Conclusions

This study revealed that osteoporotic patients preferred 6-month subcutaneous injection and oral monthly tablet, and disliked gastro-intestinal disorders. Moreover, patients were willing to pay a personal contribution or to trade treatment efficacy for better levels of other attributes. Preferences for treatment attributes varied across patients and this highlights the importance of clinical decision-making taking individual preferences into account to improve osteoporosis care.