Literature DB >> 16091022

Understanding patient preferences for HIV medications using adaptive conjoint analysis: feasibility assessment.

Kathleen M Beusterien1, Kristina Dziekan, Emuella Flood, Gale Harding, Jamie C Jordan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Choosing among HIV medications involve making trade-offs among various efficacy, convenience, resistance, and side-effect attributes. This study tested the feasibility of using adaptive conjoint analysis (ACA) to assess preferences (utilities) for HIV medication attributes.
METHODS: HIV individuals were recruited through newspaper advertisements. Participants completed a computerized ACA survey that assessed 12 attributes, including side effects, regimen convenience, resistance, and efficacy. Literature on third-agent HIV drugs was used to identify percentage risk and severity level descriptions for each attribute. Based on the ACA-derived utilities, we assessed the relative importance of the attributes by averaging individually calculated importance and estimated the percentages that would prefer selected HIV medications over others. To check validity of the ACA utilities, the survey also had respondents choose among medications with different attribute profiles.
RESULTS: The 35 respondents were primarily African Americans (94%) and unemployed (54%). Of these, 28 (80%) provided consistent responses and were analyzed. Of the 12 medication attributes evaluated, the risk of developing resistance, regimen convenience, and the risk of sleep disturbance had the greatest impact on preferences; each accounting for more than 8.5% of the variation in preferences. These were followed by risk of drug failure (8.2%), cholesterol elevation (7.1%), diarrhea (7.1%) and nausea (6.9%). The ACA utilities accurately predicted patients' actual medication choices 75% of the time.
CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive conjoint analysis was successful in predicting HIV treatment preferences under different medication scenarios. Resistance, regimen convenience, and sleep disturbance would likely make the most difference in the perceived value of a third-agent HIV medication.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16091022     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00036.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  24 in total

Review 1.  A descriptive review on methods to prioritize outcomes in a health care context.

Authors:  Inger M Janssen; Ansgar Gerhardus; Milly A Schröer-Günther; Fülöp Scheibler
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Patients' Preferences for Generic and Branded Over-the-Counter Medicines: An Adaptive Conjoint Analysis Approach.

Authors:  Merja Halme; Kari Linden; Kimmo Kääriä
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Patient willingness to take teriparatide.

Authors:  Liana Fraenkel; Barbara Gulanski; Dick Wittink
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2006-09-11

4.  Methodologic evaluation of adaptive conjoint analysis to assess patient preferences: an application in oncology.

Authors:  Arwen H Pieterse; Anne M Stiggelbout; Corrie A M Marijnen
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 5.  PrEP Product Acceptability and Dual Process Decision-Making Among Men Who Have Sex with Men.

Authors:  José A Bauermeister; Julie S Downs; Douglas S Krakower
Journal:  Curr HIV/AIDS Rep       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 5.071

6.  Patients' preferences for treatment of hepatitis C.

Authors:  Liana Fraenkel; Diane Chodkowski; Joseph Lim; Guadalupe Garcia-Tsao
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2009-07-27       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 7.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Michael D Clark; Domino Determann; Stavros Petrou; Domenico Moro; Esther W de Bekker-Grob
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Clinical factors and the decision to transfuse chronic dialysis patients.

Authors:  Cynthia B Whitman; Sanatan Shreay; Matthew Gitlin; Martijn G H van Oijen; Brennan M R Spiegel
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 8.237

9.  Racial disparities in treatment preferences for rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Florina Constantinescu; Suzanne Goucher; Arthur Weinstein; Liana Fraenkel
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 10.  Mental health service preferences of patients and providers: a scoping review of conjoint analysis and discrete choice experiments from global public health literature over the last 20 years (1999-2019).

Authors:  Anna Larsen; Albert Tele; Manasi Kumar
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.