Stakeholder perspectives on European priorities for comprehensive liver cancer control: a conjoint analysis

Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future

OBJECTIVES

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly advocated as a way to quantify preferences for health. However, increasing support does not necessarily result in increasing quality. Although specific reviews have been conducted in certain contexts, there exists no recent description of the general state of the science of health-related DCEs. The aim of this paper was to update prior reviews (1990-2012), to identify all health-related DCEs and to provide a description of trends, current practice and future challenges.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify health-related empirical DCEs published between 2013 and 2017. The search strategy and data extraction replicated prior reviews to allow the reporting of trends, although additional extraction fields were incorporated.

RESULTS

Of the 7877 abstracts generated, 301 studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. In general, the total number of DCEs per year continued to increase, with broader areas of application and increased geographic scope. Studies reported using more sophisticated designs (e.g. D-efficient) with associated software (e.g. Ngene). The trend towards using more sophisticated econometric models also continued. However, many studies presented sophisticated methods with insufficient detail. Qualitative research methods continued to be a popular approach for identifying attributes and levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of empirical DCEs in health economics continues to grow. However, inadequate reporting of methodological details inhibits quality assessment. This may reduce decision-makers' confidence in results and their ability to act on the findings. How and when to integrate health-related DCE outcomes into decision-making remains an important area for future research.

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.

An international comparison of stakeholder motivation to implement liver cancer control

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization offers clear guidance on the development of national cancer control programmes based on a country's level of resources, yet the motivation to implement such programmes may be driven by factors other than resources.

OBJECTIVES

To compare stakeholder motivation to implement a national liver cancer control programme and assess if variation in motivation was associated with stakeholder characteristics or with national indicators of need and resources.

METHODS

Relevant stakeholders were purposively selected from 13 countries (Australia, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Nigeria, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey and USA) to participate in a structured survey on liver cancer control. Respondents included 12 individuals working in clinical, 5 in policy and 3 in advocacy roles from each country. Stakeholders' motivation was measured using a scale grounded in expectancy theory and knowledge gained during previous qualitative interviews. Comparisons across countries and respondent characteristics were conducted using hierarchical regression. Country level motivation scores, holding constant individual level covariates, were correlated with indicators of need and resources and tested using Pearson's correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

In total, 260 stakeholders, equally drawn from the study countries, completed the survey (45% response rate). At the national level, motivation was highest in Nigeria, Thailand and China (P < 0.001), and lowest in Italy (P < 0.001) and Germany (P = 0.003). Higher motivation was observed among stakeholders working at the international level relative to the local level (P = 0.017). Motivation was positively associated with a country's relative burden of liver cancer (P = 0.015) and negatively associated with their level of resources (P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides the first empirical evidence on the motivation of stakeholders to implement national cancer control programmes. Furthermore, we demonstrate that motivation is more clearly associated with a country's cancer control needs rather than resources.