PURPOSE: There are 2 main medical preparations available for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Choosing between an alpha-blocker and a 5alpha-reductase inhibitor requires trade-offs between their attributes or characteristics. We investigated the relative importance of and trade-offs between the attributes of the 5alpha-reductase inhibitor dutasteride and alpha-blockers in community dwelling men using a validated technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was administered to 211 men older than 40 years who were randomly selected from the general United Kingdom population. Attributes investigated in the discrete choice experiment were time to symptom improvement, sexual and nonsexual side effects, the risks of acute urinary retention (AUR) and surgery, cost and prostate size decrease. Using regression analysis the relative importance of these attributes, the trade-offs that men are willing to make between these attributes and the willingness to pay for each attribute were estimated. RESULTS: All attributes were important to respondents. The most important attribute was side effects. The least preferred side effects was impotence, followed by decreased libido and dizziness. Respondents were willing to wait 13, 2 and 8 months longer for symptom improvement in exchange for decreased prostate size, and the risks of AUR and surgery, respectively. Men reporting moderate symptoms were less concerned about sexual side effects, time to symptom improvement and the risk of AUR compared with men reporting mild symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Given the attribute levels of BPH medical treatment, overall community dwelling men preferred the 5alpha-reductase inhibitor over alpha-blockers. In the interests of shared decision making it is important to consider the importance of eliciting the preferences of patients with BPH.
PURPOSE: There are 2 main medical preparations available for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Choosing between an alpha-blocker and a 5alpha-reductase inhibitor requires trade-offs between their attributes or characteristics. We investigated the relative importance of and trade-offs between the attributes of the 5alpha-reductase inhibitor dutasteride and alpha-blockers in community dwelling men using a validated technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was administered to 211 men older than 40 years who were randomly selected from the general United Kingdom population. Attributes investigated in the discrete choice experiment were time to symptom improvement, sexual and nonsexual side effects, the risks of acute urinary retention (AUR) and surgery, cost and prostate size decrease. Using regression analysis the relative importance of these attributes, the trade-offs that men are willing to make between these attributes and the willingness to pay for each attribute were estimated. RESULTS: All attributes were important to respondents. The most important attribute was side effects. The least preferred side effects was impotence, followed by decreased libido and dizziness. Respondents were willing to wait 13, 2 and 8 months longer for symptom improvement in exchange for decreased prostate size, and the risks of AUR and surgery, respectively. Men reporting moderate symptoms were less concerned about sexual side effects, time to symptom improvement and the risk of AUR compared with men reporting mild symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Given the attribute levels of BPH medical treatment, overall community dwelling men preferred the 5alpha-reductase inhibitor over alpha-blockers. In the interests of shared decision making it is important to consider the importance of eliciting the preferences of patients with BPH.
Authors: Peter Weibl; Tobias Klatte; Peter Laurinc; Roman Tomaškin; Shahrokh F Shariat; Miroslav Helbich; Danica Fackovcova; Peter Bujdák Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Marie-Louise Essink-Bot; Willem Jan Meerding; Bart W Koes; Ewout W Steyerberg Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2009 Impact factor: 4.981