1
|
Fujii T, Ishimura M, Takao S, Deguchi A. Preference of treatment characteristics among people with haemophilia or their caregivers, and physicians in the Japanese healthcare environment. Haemophilia 2024; 30:914-924. [PMID: 38695524 DOI: 10.1111/hae.15028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2024] [Revised: 04/12/2024] [Accepted: 04/17/2024] [Indexed: 07/18/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Studies of treatment preferences in haemophilia have been conducted in many countries. This study is the first to examine treatment characteristic preferences among people with haemophilia (PWH) and their caregivers, and physicians in Japan. AIM To examine current treatment preferences of PWH and their caregivers, plus those of physicians at haemophilia treatment centres (HTCs) and non-HTCs for different treatment characteristics in Japan. METHODS Physicians listed on a survey panel were invited to participate in the survey and to refer PWH and caregivers to participate in the survey. Web-based surveys were conducted to examine physician and PWH/caregiver background, prophylaxis background, prophylaxis goals, understanding of haemophilia treatment products, important information sources, preferences while choosing prophylaxis products, understanding of the patient's condition, and potential product switching. A discrete choice experiment exercise was included in the survey. RESULTS A total of 107 physicians and 44 PWH/caregivers participated in the study. Key treatment goals of physicians included optimisation of haemophilia management. PWH/caregivers were focused on quality of life and reduced treatment burden. Consistent differences in haemophilia treatment strategies at HTCs and non-HTCs were observed for prescribed treatments, preferences in choosing prophylaxis products, understanding of patients' condition, and reasons for potential product switch. CONCLUSION Our study utilises real-world survey data and presents preferences for haemophilia treatment characteristics among physicians, PWH and their caregivers in Japan, which could encourage improvements in individualised treatment and disease management. Alignment between treatment approaches at HTCs and non-HTCs could facilitate improvements in the quality of care for PWH across Japan.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Teruhisa Fujii
- Division of Transfusion Medicine, Hemophilia Treatment Center, Hiroshima University Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Masataka Ishimura
- Department of Pediatrics, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Satomi Takao
- Medical Affairs Department, Novo Nordisk Pharma Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
| | - Ayumi Deguchi
- Medical Affairs Department, Novo Nordisk Pharma Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang L, Liu S, Jiang S, Li C, Lu L, Fang Y, Li S. Quantifying Benefit-Risk Trade-Offs Toward Prophylactic Treatment Among Adult Patients With Hemophilia A in China: Discrete Choice Experiment Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill 2023; 9:e45747. [PMID: 37494098 PMCID: PMC10413247 DOI: 10.2196/45747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2023] [Revised: 05/25/2023] [Accepted: 06/17/2023] [Indexed: 07/27/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hemophilia A is a chronic condition that requires meticulous treatment and management. Patient preferences for prophylactic treatment can substantially influence adherence, outcomes, and quality of life, yet these preferences remain underexplored, particularly in China. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to investigate the preferences for prophylactic treatment among Chinese adult patients with hemophilia A without inhibitors, considering clinical effectiveness, side effects, dosing mode, and dosing frequency. METHODS A discrete choice experiment was used to elicit patient preferences for prophylactic treatment of hemophilia. The study was conducted across 7 provinces in China with socioeconomic and geographical diversity. Subgroup analysis was performed according to education level, geographic location, and treatment type, alongside the exploration of benefit-risk trade-offs. RESULTS A total of 113 patients completed the discrete choice experiment questionnaire, and we included 102 responses for analysis based on predetermined exclusion criteria. The study found that patients prioritized reducing annual bleeding times and avoiding the risk of developing inhibitors over treatment process attributes. Subgroup analysis revealed that lower-educated patients and those from rural areas attached more importance to the dosing mode, likely due to barriers to self-administration. Patients demonstrated a clear understanding of benefit-risk trade-offs, exhibiting a willingness to accept an increased risk of developing inhibitors for improved clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS This study provides valuable insights into the preferences of patients with hemophilia A for prophylactic treatment in China. Understanding these preferences can enhance shared decision-making between patients and clinicians, fostering personalized prophylactic treatment plans that may optimize adherence and improve clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Limin Wang
- Centre for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health,Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China
- NHC Key Laboratory of Health Economics and Policy Research, Shandong University, Jinan, China
- Centre for Health Preference Research, Shandong University, Jinan, China
| | - Shimeng Liu
- School of Public Health, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- NHC Key Laboratory of Health Technology Assessment, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Shan Jiang
- Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie Business School and Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
| | - Chaofan Li
- Centre for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health,Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China
- NHC Key Laboratory of Health Economics and Policy Research, Shandong University, Jinan, China
- Centre for Health Preference Research, Shandong University, Jinan, China
| | - Liyong Lu
- Centre for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health,Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China
- NHC Key Laboratory of Health Economics and Policy Research, Shandong University, Jinan, China
- Centre for Health Preference Research, Shandong University, Jinan, China
| | - Yunhai Fang
- Shandong Hemophilia Treatment Center, Shandong Blood Center, Jinan, China
| | - Shunping Li
- Centre for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health,Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China
- NHC Key Laboratory of Health Economics and Policy Research, Shandong University, Jinan, China
- Centre for Health Preference Research, Shandong University, Jinan, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Woollacott I, Morgan G, Chowdary P, O'Hara J, Franks B, van Overbeeke E, Dunn N, Michelsen S, Huys I, Martin A, Cawson M, Brownrigg J, Winburn I, Thomson J. Examining patient and professional perspectives in the UK for gene therapy in haemophilia. Haemophilia 2022; 28:588-609. [PMID: 35438818 PMCID: PMC9546085 DOI: 10.1111/hae.14572] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2021] [Revised: 04/01/2022] [Accepted: 04/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Introduction With the development of gene therapy for people with haemophilia (PWH), it is important to understand how people impacted by haemophilia (PIH) and clinicians prioritise haemophilia treatment attributes to support informed treatment decisions. Objective To examine the treatment attribute preferences of PIH and clinical experts in the United Kingdom (UK) and to develop a profile of gene therapy characteristics fit for use in future discrete choice experiments (DCEs). Methods Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with PIH (n = 14) and clinical experts (n = 6) who ranked pre‐defined treatment attributes by importance. Framework analysis was conducted to identify key themes and treatment attributes; points were allocated based on the rankings. Synthesis of results by a multidisciplinary group informed development of a profile of gene therapy characteristics for use in future research. Results Key themes identified by PIH and clinical experts included patient relevant features and the importance of ‘informed decision making'. The six top‐ranked treatment attributes were ‘effect on factor level’ (79 points), ‘uncertainty regarding long‐term risks’ (57 points), ‘impact on daily life’ (41 points), ‘frequency of monitoring’ (33 points), ‘impact on ability to participate in physical activity’ (29 points), and ‘uncertainty regarding long‐term benefits’ (28 points). The final treatment characteristics were categorised as therapeutic option, treatment effectiveness, safety concerns, impact on self‐management and quality of life (role limitations). Conclusion We identified several gene therapy characteristics important to PIH and clinicians in the UK. These characteristics will be used in a future DCE to further investigate patient preferences for gene therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Pratima Chowdary
- Katharine Dormandy Haemophilia and Thrombosis Centre, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - Jamie O'Hara
- HCD Economics, Daresbury, UK.,Faculty of Health and Social Care, University of Chester, Chester, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
van Overbeeke E, Hauber B, Michelsen S, Goldman M, Simoens S, Huys I. Patient Preferences to Assess Value IN Gene Therapies: Protocol Development for the PAVING Study in Hemophilia. Front Med (Lausanne) 2021; 8:595797. [PMID: 33768101 PMCID: PMC7985056 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.595797] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2020] [Accepted: 02/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Gene therapies are innovative therapies that are increasingly being developed. However, health technology assessment (HTA) and payer decision making on these therapies is impeded by uncertainties, especially regarding long-term outcomes. Through measuring patient preferences regarding gene therapies, the importance of unique elements that go beyond health gain can be quantified and inform value assessments. We designed a study, namely the Patient preferences to Assess Value IN Gene therapies (PAVING) study, that can inform HTA and payers by investigating trade-offs that adult Belgian hemophilia A and B patients are willing to make when asked to choose between a standard of care and gene therapy. Methods and Analysis: An eight-step approach was taken to establish the protocol for this study: (1) stated preference method selection, (2) initial attributes identification, (3) stakeholder (HTA and payer) needs identification, (4) patient relevant attributes and information needs identification, (5) level identification and choice task construction, (6) educational tool design, (7) survey integration, and (8) piloting and pretesting. In the end, a threshold technique survey was designed using the attributes “Annual bleeding rate,” “Chance to stop prophylaxis,” “Time that side effects have been studied,” and “Quality of Life.” Ethics and Dissemination: The Medical Ethics Committee of UZ KU Leuven/Research approved the study. Results from the study will be presented to stakeholders and patients at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. We hope that results from the PAVING study can inform decision makers on the acceptability of uncertainties and the value of gene therapies to patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eline van Overbeeke
- Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Brett Hauber
- Health Preference Assessment, RTI Health Solutions, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Sissel Michelsen
- Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Healthcare Management Centre, Vlerick Business School, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Michel Goldman
- Institute for Interdisciplinary Innovation in Healthcare, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Steven Simoens
- Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Benton M, Patel AM, Shi L, Monnette A, Hong D, Kruse-Jarres R, Raimundo K. Assessing patient and caregiver preferences for treatment of haemophilia A: A discrete choice experiment. Haemophilia 2020; 27:e479-e483. [PMID: 33215806 PMCID: PMC8359479 DOI: 10.1111/hae.14185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2020] [Revised: 10/12/2020] [Accepted: 10/14/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Melody Benton
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | | | - Lizheng Shi
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Alisha Monnette
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Dongzhe Hong
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Pearce A, Harrison M, Watson V, Street DJ, Howard K, Bansback N, Bryan S. Respondent Understanding in Discrete Choice Experiments: A Scoping Review. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2020; 14:17-53. [PMID: 33141359 PMCID: PMC7794102 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-020-00467-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/30/2020] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
Introduction Despite the recognised importance of participant understanding for valid and reliable discrete choice experiment (DCE) results, there has been limited assessment of whether, and how, people understand DCEs, and how ‘understanding’ is conceptualised in DCEs applied to a health context. Objectives Our aim was to identify how participant understanding is conceptualised in the DCE literature in a health context. Our research questions addressed how participant understanding is defined, measured, and used. Methods Searches were conducted (June 2019) in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Econlit databases, as well as hand searching. Search terms were based on previous DCE systematic reviews, with additional understanding keywords used in a proximity-based search strategy. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed journal articles in the field of health, related to DCE or best-worst scaling type 3 (BWS3) studies, and reporting some consideration or assessment of participant understanding. A descriptive analytical approach was used to chart relevant data from each study, including publication year, country, clinical area, subject group, sample size, study design, numbers of attributes, levels and choice sets, definition of understanding, how understanding was tested, results of the understanding tests, and how the information about understanding was used. Each study was categorised based on how understanding was conceptualised and used within the study. Results Of 306 potentially eligible articles identified, 31 were excluded based on titles and abstracts, and 200 were excluded on full-text review, resulting in 75 included studies. Three categories of study were identified: applied DCEs (n = 52), pretesting studies (n = 7) and studies of understanding (n = 16). Typically, understanding was defined in relation to either the choice context, such as attribute terminology, or the concept of choosing. Very few studies considered respondents’ engagement as a component of understanding. Understanding was measured primarily through qualitative pretesting, rationality or validity tests included in the survey, and participant self-report, however reporting and use of the results of these methods was inconsistent. Conclusions Those conducting or using health DCEs should carefully select, justify, and report the measurement and potential impact of participant understanding in their specific choice context. There remains scope for research into the different components of participant understanding, particularly related to engagement, the impact of participant understanding on DCE validity and reliability, the best measures of understanding, and methods to maximise participant understanding. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40271-020-00467-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison Pearce
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Mark Harrison
- Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Verity Watson
- Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland
| | - Deborah J Street
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Kirsten Howard
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Nick Bansback
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Stirling Bryan
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Fifer S, Kerr AM, Parken C, Hamrosi K, Eid S. Treatment preferences in people with haemophilia A or caregivers of people with haemophilia A: A discrete choice experiment. Haemophilia 2020; 26 Suppl 5:30-40. [DOI: 10.1111/hae.14037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2019] [Accepted: 04/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Simon Fifer
- Community and Patient Preference Research Pty Ltd Sydney NSW Australia
| | | | | | - Kim Hamrosi
- Community and Patient Preference Research Pty Ltd Sydney NSW Australia
- Deloitte Sydney NSW Australia
| | - Samantha Eid
- Community and Patient Preference Research Pty Ltd Sydney NSW Australia
- Suncorp Group Sydney NSW Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Su J, Li N, Joshi N, Ng X, Botteman M, Shah R, Jain N, Lyn N, Preblick R. Patient and caregiver preferences for haemophilia A treatments: A discrete choice experiment. Haemophilia 2020; 26:e291-e299. [DOI: 10.1111/hae.14137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2020] [Revised: 06/23/2020] [Accepted: 08/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Jun Su
- Sanofi Genzyme Cambridge MA USA
| | | | - Namita Joshi
- Pharmerit, an OPEN Health Company Bethesda MD USA
| | - Xinyi Ng
- Pharmerit, an OPEN Health Company Bethesda MD USA
| | | | - Rachel Shah
- Pharmerit, an OPEN Health Company Bethesda MD USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Tegenge MA, Belov A, Moncur M, Forshee R, Irony T. Comparing clotting factors attributes across different methods of preference elicitation in haemophilia patients. Haemophilia 2020; 26:817-825. [PMID: 32842165 DOI: 10.1111/hae.14119] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2020] [Revised: 06/05/2020] [Accepted: 07/14/2020] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Emerging, systematic approaches for capturing patient input, such as preference elicitation, can provide valuable information for the benefit-risk assessment of medical products for treating bleeding disorders, such as haemophilia. AIM This study aims to identify existing and develop new methods to capture, rank and summarize preference scores for clotting factor therapies. METHODS Haemophilia patient preference data were compiled from studies identified through literature review and publicly available US FDA patient-focused drug development meeting documents. Text mining was performed to identify major themes across studies. A standardized preference score was estimated and aggregated. RESULTS Ten preference studies that employed qualitative (n = 3), and quantitative methods (n = 7) met the inclusion criteria. Text mining of qualitative and quantitative studies revealed similar themes as the standardized preference attribute importance. We found that seven quantitative studies employed discrete choice experiments (DCE)/conjoint analysis (CA) and examined a range of 5-12 attributes. For DCE/CA studies published prior to 2014 (n = 4), safety attributes (inhibitor and viral safety) were among the most important attributes, accounting for ~46% of the total utility measured. DCE/CA studies published after 2014 (n = 3) focused on frequency of infusion and reduction of bleeding risk, accounting for ~67% of the total utility. Interestingly, two studies that used different preference elicitation approaches (DCE and a monadic conjoint approach) both ranked infusion frequency as the most important attribute. CONCLUSIONS Although there are few published patient preference studies for haemophilia, the results of this study can be viewed in the larger context of enhancing scientific methods of incorporating patient input in medical product development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Million A Tegenge
- Office of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Artur Belov
- Office of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Megan Moncur
- Office of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Richard Forshee
- Office of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Telba Irony
- Office of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
De Abreu Lourenco R, Haas M, Hall J, Viney R. Valuing Meta-Health Effects for Use in Economic Evaluations to Inform Reimbursement Decisions: A Review of the Evidence. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2017; 35:347-362. [PMID: 27858368 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-016-0470-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This review explores the evidence from the literature regarding how meta-health effects (effects other than health resulting from the consumption of health care) are valued for use in economic evaluations. METHODS A systematic review of the published literature (the EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EconLit and SocINDEX databases were searched for publications in March 2016, plus manual searching) investigated the associations between study methods and the resulting values for meta-health effects estimated for use in economic evaluations. The review considered which meta-health effects were being valued and how this differed by evaluation approach, intervention investigated, source of funds and year of publication. Detailed reasons for differences observed between values for comparable meta-health effects were explored, accounting for the method of valuation. RESULTS The search of the literature revealed 71 studies of interest; 35% involved drug interventions, with convenience, information and process of care the three meta-health effects most often investigated. Key associations with the meta-health effects were the evaluation method, the intervention, and the source of funds. Relative values for meta-health effects ranged from 0.9% to 68% of the overall value reported in a study. For a given meta-health effect, the magnitude of the effect evaluated and how the meta-health effect was described and framed relative to overall health explained the differences in relative values. CONCLUSIONS Evidence from the literature shows variability in how meta-health effects are being measured for use in economic evaluations. Understanding the sources of that variability is important if decision makers are to have confidence in how meta-health effects are valued.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard De Abreu Lourenco
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Level 2, Block 5D, Quay St, Haymarket, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Marion Haas
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Level 2, Block 5D, Quay St, Haymarket, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Jane Hall
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Level 2, Block 5D, Quay St, Haymarket, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Rosalie Viney
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Level 2, Block 5D, Quay St, Haymarket, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Cheung KL, Wijnen BFM, Hollin IL, Janssen EM, Bridges JF, Evers SMAA, Hiligsmann M. Using Best-Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2016; 34:1195-1209. [PMID: 27402349 PMCID: PMC5110583 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-016-0429-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 144] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/07/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kei Long Cheung
- Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Research School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Ben F M Wijnen
- Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Research School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Epilepsy Centre Kempenhaeghe, Heeze, The Netherlands
| | - Ilene L Hollin
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ellen M Janssen
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - John F Bridges
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Silvia M A A Evers
- Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Research School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Mickael Hiligsmann
- Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Research School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Marshall H, Chen G, Clarke M, Ratcliffe J. Adolescent, parent and societal preferences and willingness to pay for meningococcal B vaccine: A Discrete Choice Experiment. Vaccine 2016; 34:671-677. [DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.11.075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2015] [Revised: 10/26/2015] [Accepted: 11/30/2015] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
|
13
|
Lock J, de Bekker-Grob EW, Urhan G, Peters M, Meijer K, Brons P, van der Meer FJM, Driessens MHE, Collins PW, Fijnvandraat K, Leebeek FWG, Cnossen MH. Facilitating the implementation of pharmacokinetic-guided dosing of prophylaxis in haemophilia care by discrete choice experiment. Haemophilia 2015; 22:e1-e10. [DOI: 10.1111/hae.12851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/20/2015] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- J. Lock
- Department of Paediatric Haematology; Erasmus University Medical Centre - Sophia Children's Hospital; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | - E. W. de Bekker-Grob
- Department of Public Health; Erasmus University Medical Centre; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | - G. Urhan
- Department of Paediatric Haematology; Erasmus University Medical Centre - Sophia Children's Hospital; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | - M. Peters
- Department of Paediatric Haematology; Academic Medical Centre; Amsterdam The Netherlands
| | - K. Meijer
- Department of Haematology; University Medical Centre Groningen; University of Groningen; Groningen The Netherlands
| | - P. Brons
- Department of Paediatric Haematology; Radboud university medical centre; Nijmegen The Netherlands
| | - F. J. M. van der Meer
- Department of Thrombosis and Haemostasis; Leiden University Medical Centre; Leiden The Netherlands
| | | | - P. W. Collins
- Arthur Bloom Haemophilia Centre; School of Medicine; Cardiff University; Cardiff UK
| | - K. Fijnvandraat
- Department of Paediatric Haematology; Academic Medical Centre; Amsterdam The Netherlands
| | - F. W. G. Leebeek
- Department of Haematology; Erasmus University Medical Centre; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | - M. H. Cnossen
- Department of Paediatric Haematology; Erasmus University Medical Centre - Sophia Children's Hospital; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
de Vries ST, de Vries FM, Dekker T, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, de Zeeuw D, Ranchor AV, Denig P. The Role of Patients' Age on Their Preferences for Choosing Additional Blood Pressure-Lowering Drugs: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Patients with Diabetes. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0139755. [PMID: 26445349 PMCID: PMC4596700 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139755] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2015] [Accepted: 09/15/2015] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Objectives To assess whether patients’ willingness to add a blood pressure-lowering drug and the importance they attach to specific treatment characteristics differ among age groups in patients with type 2 diabetes. Materials and Methods Patients being prescribed at least an oral glucose-lowering and a blood pressure-lowering drug completed a questionnaire including a discrete choice experiment. This experiment contained choice sets with hypothetical blood pressure-lowering drugs and a no additional drug alternative, which differed in their characteristics (i.e. effects and intake moments). Differences in willingness to add a drug were compared between patients <75 years (non-aged) and ≥75 years (aged) using Pearson χ2-tests. Multinomial logit models were used to assess and compare the importance attached to the characteristics. Results Of the 161 patients who completed the questionnaire, 151 (72%) could be included in the analyses (mean age 68 years; 42% female). Aged patients were less willing to add a drug than non-aged patients (67% versus 84% respectively; P = 0.017). In both age groups, the effect on blood pressure was most important for choosing a drug, followed by the risk of adverse drug events and the risk of death. The effect on limitations due to stroke was only significant in the non-aged group. The effect on blood pressure was slightly more important in the non-aged than the aged group (P = 0.043). Conclusions Aged patients appear less willing to add a preventive drug than non-aged patients. The importance attached to various treatment characteristics does not seem to differ much among age groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sieta T. de Vries
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Folgerdiena M. de Vries
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Thijs Dekker
- Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Flora M. Haaijer-Ruskamp
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Dick de Zeeuw
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Adelita V. Ranchor
- Department of Health Psychology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Petra Denig
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Furlan R, Krishnan S, Vietri J. Patient and parent preferences for characteristics of prophylactic treatment in hemophilia. Patient Prefer Adherence 2015; 9:1687-94. [PMID: 26648701 PMCID: PMC4664548 DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s92520] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION New longer-acting factor products will potentially allow for less frequent infusion in prophylactic treatment of hemophilia. However, the role of administration frequency relative to other treatment attributes in determining preferences for prophylactic hemophilia treatment regimens is not well understood. AIM To identify the relative importance of frequency of administration, efficacy, and other treatment characteristics among candidates for prophylactic treatment for hemophilia A and B. METHOD An Internet survey was conducted among hemophilia patients and the parents of pediatric hemophilia patients in Australia, Canada, and the US. A monadic conjoint task was included in the survey, which varied frequency of administration (three, two, or one time per week for hemophilia A; twice weekly, weekly, or biweekly for hemophilia B), efficacy (no bleeding or breakthrough bleeding once every 4 months, 6 months, or 12 months), diluent volume (3 mL vs 2.5 mL for hemophilia A; 5 mL vs 3 mL for hemophilia B), vials per infusion (2 vs 1), reconstitution device (assembly required vs not), and manufacturer (established in hemophilia vs not). Respondents were asked their likelihood to switch from their current regimen to the presented treatment. Respondents were told to assume that other aspects of treatment, such as risk of inhibitor development, cost, and method of distribution, would remain the same. RESULTS A total of 89 patients and/or parents of children with hemophilia A participated; another 32 were included in the exercise for hemophilia B. Relative importance was 47%, 24%, and 18% for frequency of administration, efficacy, and manufacturer, respectively, in hemophilia A; analogous values were 48%, 26%, and 21% in hemophilia B. The remaining attributes had little impact on preferences. CONCLUSION Patients who are candidates for prophylaxis and their caregivers indicate a preference for reduced frequency of administration and high efficacy, but preferences were more sensitive to administration frequency than small changes in annual bleeding rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Jeffrey Vietri
- Health Outcomes, Kantar Health, Milan, Italy
- Correspondence: Jeffrey Vietri, Kantar Health, 700 Dresher Road, Horsham, PA 19044, USA, Tel +1 484 442 1437, Email
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Clark MD, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D, de Bekker-Grob EW. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2014; 32:883-902. [PMID: 25005924 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-014-0170-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 503] [Impact Index Per Article: 50.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly used in health economics to address a wide range of health policy-related concerns. OBJECTIVE Broadly adopting the methodology of an earlier systematic review of health-related DCEs, which covered the period 2001-2008, we report whether earlier trends continued during 2009-2012. METHODS This paper systematically reviews health-related DCEs published between 2009 and 2012, using the same database as the earlier published review (PubMed) to obtain citations, and the same range of search terms. RESULTS A total of 179 health-related DCEs for 2009-2012 met the inclusion criteria for the review. We found a continuing trend towards conducting DCEs across a broader range of countries. However, the trend towards including fewer attributes was reversed, whilst the trend towards interview-based DCEs reversed because of increased computer administration. The trend towards using more flexible econometric models, including mixed logit and latent class, has also continued. Reporting of monetary values has fallen compared with earlier periods, but the proportion of studies estimating trade-offs between health outcomes and experience factors, or valuing outcomes in terms of utility scores, has increased, although use of odds ratios and probabilities has declined. The reassuring trend towards the use of more flexible and appropriate DCE designs and econometric methods has been reinforced by the increased use of qualitative methods to inform DCE processes and results. However, qualitative research methods are being used less often to inform attribute selection, which may make DCEs more susceptible to omitted variable bias if the decision framework is not known prior to the research project. CONCLUSIONS The use of DCEs in healthcare continues to grow dramatically, as does the scope of applications across an expanding range of countries. There is increasing evidence that more sophisticated approaches to DCE design and analytical techniques are improving the quality of final outputs. That said, recent evidence that the use of qualitative methods to inform attribute selection has declined is of concern.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael D Clark
- Department of Economics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK,
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Janssen IM, Gerhardus A, Schröer-Günther MA, Scheibler F. A descriptive review on methods to prioritize outcomes in a health care context. Health Expect 2014; 18:1873-93. [PMID: 25156207 DOI: 10.1111/hex.12256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/01/2014] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Inger M Janssen
- Department of Epidemiology & International Public Health, University of Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany.,Department of Health Information, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG), Köln, Germany
| | - Ansgar Gerhardus
- Department of Health Services Research, Institute for Public Health and Nursing Science, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| | - Milly A Schröer-Günther
- Department of Non-Drug Interventions, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG), Köln, Germany
| | - Fülöp Scheibler
- Department of Non-Drug Interventions, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG), Köln, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
de Jager T, Pericleous L, Kokot-Kierepa M, Naderi M, Karimi M. The burden and management of FXIII deficiency. Haemophilia 2014; 20:733-40. [DOI: 10.1111/hae.12474] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/27/2014] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- T. de Jager
- Pharmerit International; AV Rotterdam the Netherlands
| | | | | | - M. Naderi
- Genetics of Non-Communicable Disease Research Center; Zahedan University of Medical Sciences; Zahedan Iran
| | - M. Karimi
- Haematology Research Centre; Shiraz University of Medical Sciences; Shiraz Iran
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Best worst discrete choice experiments in health: Methods and an application. Soc Sci Med 2013; 76:74-82. [DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.10.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2012] [Revised: 10/06/2012] [Accepted: 10/25/2012] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
|
20
|
Brown TM, Horblyuk RV, Grotzinger KM, Matzdorff AC, Pashos CL. Patient-reported treatment burden of chronic immune thrombocytopenia therapies. BMC BLOOD DISORDERS 2012; 12:2. [PMID: 22436142 PMCID: PMC3350461 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2326-12-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2011] [Accepted: 03/22/2012] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
Background Chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is a debilitating autoimmune disorder that causes a reduction in blood platelets and increased risk of bleeding. ITP is currently managed with various pharmacologic therapies and splenectomy. This study was conducted to assess patient perceived and reported treatment side effects, as well as the perceived burden or bother, and need to reduce or stop treatment, associated with these side effects among adult patients with chronic ITP. Methods A Web-enabled survey was administered to members of a US-based ITP patient support group. Patients reported demographic and clinical characteristics, ITP treatments' side effects for treatments received since diagnosed, level of bother (or distress), and need to reduce or stop treatment, associated with side effects. Current and past exposure was assessed for five specific treatment types: corticosteroids (CS), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), anti-D immunoglobulin (anti-D), rituximab (RT), and splenectomy (SPL), as well as for other patient-referenced therapies (captured as "other"). Results The survey was completed by 589 patients; 78% female, 89% white, mean age 48 years (SD = 14.71), and 68% reported a typical low platelet count of < 50,000/μL. Current or past treatment with CS was reported by 92% (n = 542) of patients, 56% (n = 322) for IVIg, 36% (n = 209) for anti-D, 36% (n = 213) for RT, and 39% (n = 227) for SPL. A substantial proportion of CS-treated patients reported side effects (98%, P < 0.05), were highly bothered by their side effects (53.1%, P < 0.05), and reported the need to stop or reduce treatment due to side effects (37.8%, P < 0.05). Among patients reporting side effects of treatment, significant associations were noted for the number of side effects, aggregate bother of reported side effects, and the need to stop or reduce treatment (all P < 0.05). Conclusions Current ITP treatments, particularly corticosteroids, are associated with multiple bothersome side effects that may lead to patients stopping or reducing therapy. Open, informed and complete communication between clinician and patient regarding both the benefits and the side effects of ITP treatment may better prepare patients for their prescribed regimens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Axel C Matzdorff
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Caritasklinikum Saarbruecken, St. Theresia, Saarbruecken, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|